Professional Negligence Law Reporter

The Kansas Supreme Court, equally divided, affirmed a lower court ruling reversing summary judgment for the defense in a medical negligence suit involving the removal of the wrong organ during a surgical procedure.

Jeannine Williams-Davidson was hospitalized for removal of her adrenal gland. Physician Nason Lui removed part of Williams-Davidson’s pancreas instead, which led to an additional surgery and an extended hospital stay. Approximately two years later, Williams-Davidson and her husband sued Lui and the hospital for medical negligence and other claims. The plaintiffs did not retain expert witnesses, believing that the common knowledge exception applied. Disagreeing, the trial court granted summary judgment for the defense. An appellate court reversed and remanded.

Affirming the lower appellate court, the state high court noted that the common knowledge exception applies when the diagnosis and treatment of a patient is so lacking in reasonable care that this would be apparent to and within the common knowledge and experience of an average person. The court noted that, like the lower appellate court, it was equally divided on whether the exception applies to the plaintiffs’ claims. Citing case law, the court concluded that when an appellate court is equally divided, the lower court’s ruling stands. Thus, the court concluded that the lower appellate court’s ruling reversing the trial court stands in this case.

Citation: Williams-Davidson v. Lui, 544 P.3d 854 (Kan. 2024).

Plaintiff counsel: Jason W. Belveal, Holton, Kan.