A Jury Does Not Need to Make an Express Finding of Liability as to Each Defendant to Establish a Hospital’s Vicarious Liability for a Child’s Brain Injury

Marshall Dennehey
Contact

Marshall Dennehey

Hagans v. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 2025 Pa. Super. 142 (July 10, 2025)

The Superior Court affirmed the order of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas denying the defendant-hospital’s motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, new trial, and remitter. The court also entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff-parent and against the defendant-hospital.

On appeal, the defendant-hospital argued that the verdict must be vacated because the plaintiff failed to asked the jury to determine the liability of any agent or employee as a necessary predicate to a finding of vicarious liability. The Superior Court was not persuaded.

According to the Superior Court, the trial court had found that, through expert testimony and other evidence presented at trial, the plaintiff sufficiently established the defendant-hospital’s agents acted negligently. Also, the jury did not need to make an express finding as to each individual defendant. The plaintiff was required to establish the liability of the defendant-hospital’s employees to determine if the defendant-hospital was vicariously liable, which the plaintiff did. Thus, the defendant-hospital’s liability was based on the actions of its employees.

Written by:

Marshall Dennehey
Contact
more
less

What do you want from legal thought leadership?

Please take our short survey – your perspective helps to shape how firms create relevant, useful content that addresses your needs:

Marshall Dennehey on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide