Legal Opinion

Comer v. Risko

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 14, 2005No. 2004-0284PublishedCited by 302 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.

{¶ 1} The narrow issue before us is whether, within the constraints of Clark v. Southview Hosp. & Family Health Ctr. (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 435, 628 N.E.2d 46, a viable claim exists against a hospital under a theory of agency by estoppel for the negligence of an independent-contractor physician when the physician cannot be made a party because the statute of limitations has expired.

{¶ 2} We hold that agency by estoppel is a derivative claim of vicarious liability whereby the liability of the hospital must flow through the independent-contractor physician. Consequently, there can be no viable…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Cooper v. Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Johnson v. Wagner Provision Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Albain v. Flower HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Clark v. Southview Hospital & Family Health CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Losito v. Kruse, Jr.Ohio Supreme Court · 1940

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by302 opinions

  1. Hudson v. Petrosurance, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010
  2. City of Sharonville v. American Employers InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Ohio Government Risk Management Plan v. HarrisonOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Smith v. McBrideOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Kaminski v. Metal & Wire Products Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010

297 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API