Legal Aspects Of Health Care Administration 11th Edition by George Pozgar

Exercise 17

Facts
Dr. Mikey examined Stroud. After viewing x- rays, Mikey told Stroud that she might have lung cancer and referred her to Dr. Gullatt for follow-up care. A computed tomography (CT) scan was performed at St. Francis Medical Center, and the findings were interpreted by a radiologist, Dr. Golson, who interpreted Stroud's CT scan as negative for lung cancer.
Approximately 1 year later, Stroud was hospitalized at St. Francis for a cerebral hemorrhage. X-rays and CT scans revealed inoperative cancer in Stroud's left lung.
Stroud was discharged from St. Francis and later died as a result of the cancer. The decedent's husband and sons filed a suit seeking damages arising from Golson's failure to properly interpret Stroud's CT scan. Before trial, the plaintiffs settled with Golson and his insurer.
On February 23, 1998, a trial by jury commenced against the Patients' Compensation Fund (PCF), which admitted medical negligence but claimed that Stroud would have died from the fast-acting cancer even if it had been diagnosed earlier. The jury returned a verdict finding that Stroud lost a lessthan- even chance of survival because of Golson's negligence.
The defendant argued that the trial judge erred when he overruled the hearsay objection regarding Mr. Stroud's testimony concerning his wife's reasons for declining treatment after her cancer was diagnosed. The testimony at issue centered around the following:
Mr. Thomas: Now, did your wife discuss- you-you and your wife discuss whether or not she should have treatment for her cancer?
Mr. Stroud: Yes, we did.
Mr. Thomas: And were you a part in making a decision with her with why she did not agree to have treatment?
Mr. Stroud: Yes.
Mr. Thomas: Share with the jury what she said about that.
Mr. Stroud: She, ah,-
Mr. Anzelmo: Your Honor, I object to hearsay.
The Court: I understand. But, I think it-It is hearsay but it's reliable. I'll allow it.
Mr. Thomas: Go ahead.
Mr. Stroud: Ah, I had a-My sister passed away in November '94 with lung cancer, and she found out in July of '94 that she had lung cancer. So she went and took the radium treatments, and she weighed 125 pounds and was eating and doing all right until she started taking the radium treatments, and by the end of the radium treatments she could hardly get about, and actually she just laid down and starved herself to death. She weighed 65 pounds when she passed away, and was bedridden all that time. And the wife felt that it was too far gone in her for any treatments to do any good, plus what few days she had left she didn't want to be like my sister.
Issue
Did the trial judge err when he overruled the hearsay objection regarding Stroud's testimony?
Holding
The appeals court found no abuse of discretion by the trial court.
Reason
Stroud suffered a great deal of mental anguish from the hopeless condition she faced, knowing that earlier detection was lost because her CT scan was not properly read. Her decision not to undergo the painful and debilitating chemotherapy, when the odds were so stacked against her recovery, was justified. It is a reasonable conclusion that Stroud would have, in all likelihood, opted for the treatment had the cancer been properly diagnosed earlier.
Stroud's testimony regarding statements his wife made provided statements of her then-existing state of mind. The testimony showed the motive behind Stroud's decision not to receive treatment, namely, her belief that the treatments would not be effective, as well as her desire to avoid the severe pain and discomfort that can accompany chemotherapy.
Discuss under what circumstances the courts sustain objection to the entry of hearsay into evidence.