Updated June 2014 MN506 - Unit 9 Page 1 of 5 SCHOOL .docx

Updated: June 2014 MN506 - Unit 9 Page 1 of 5
SCHOOL OF NURSING
MN506: Unit 9 Assignment
Group Project: Legal Malpractice Case
Description
You will construct a group contract in Unit 3. In the contract,
you will determine how your group
will communicate and share documents. Roles of the group will
be delineated. You will work
from Unit 3 until Unit 9 on a malpractice case.
There are two malpractice cases. Your instructor will assign
your either Case Study 1:
Malpractice Action brought by Yolanda Pinnelas or Case Study
2: Wrongful Death by Howard
Carpenter on Behalf of Wilma Carpenter, Deceased. The group
will construct a 10–15 page
paper about the legal constructs involved in ONE of the cases.
Directions:
The group will write a 10–15 page APA formatted paper. (Title
page and references list do NOT
count towards the 1–15 pages). Support the paper with peer
reviewed articles and case law

where applicable. You may have an appendix that has samples
of documents that support your
positions or expands on the facts of the case.
You will post a draft of the group paper in the Discussion area
of Unit 8. This will give you
an opportunity to get peer feedback and to learn from others.
You may use Goggle Hangouts™, SKYPE®, or other
conferencing tools. Additionally you may
want to use a document-sharing tool such as Google Drive®.
The paper should discuss the
following issues:
Liability issues
Parties involved and who should be sued
Defenses of the parties
Documents that the Plaintiff’s side will ask for and how they
will be used
Standards of care
Duty, breach, damages, and proximate cause
Insurance issues
Risk management issues before and after the incident
Documentation and mandatory reporting
Who should write the incident report and what should it say?
The doctrine of Respondeat Superior and how it would apply

The issues surrounding informed consent
Updated: June 2014 MN506- Unit 9 Page 2 of 5
Preparation for court of the parties
Due: Day 7 by 11:59 p.m. (ET)
To view the Grading Rubric for this Assignment, please visit
the Grading Rubrics section
of the Course Home.
Case Study 1: Malpractice Action Brought by Yolanda
Pinnelas
People Involved in Case:
Yolanda Pinnelas-patient
Betty DePalma, RN, MS-nursing supervisor
Elizabeth Adelman, RN, recovery room nurse
William Brady, M.D., plastic surgeon
Mary Jones, RN-IV insertion
Carol Price, LPN
Jeffery Chambers, RN-staff nurse
Patricia Peters, PharmD-pharmacy

Diana Smith, RN
Susan Post, JD-Risk Manager
Amy Green-Quality Assurance
Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS-Education coordinator
SAFE-INFUSE-pump
Brand X infusion pump
Caring Memorial Hospital
Facts:
The patient, Yolanda Pinellas is a 21-year-old female admitted
to Caring Memorial Hospital for
chemotherapy. Caring Memorial is a hospital in Upstate New
York. Yolanda was a student at
Ithaca College and studying to be a music conductor.
Yolanda was diagnosed with anal cancer and was to receive
Mitomycin for her chemotherapy.
Mary Jones, RN inserted the IV on the day shift around 1300,
and the patient, Yolanda, was to
have Mitomycin administered through the IV. An infusion
machine was used for the delivery.
The Mitomycin was hung by Jeffrey Chambers, RN and he was
assigned to Yolanda. The unit
had several very sick patients and was short staffed. Jeffery had
worked a double shift the day
before and had to double back to cover the evening shift. He
was able to go home between shift
and had about 6 hours of sleep before returning. The pharmacy
was late in delivering the drug
so it was not hung until the evening shift. Patricia Peters,

PharmD brought the chemotherapy to
the unit.
On the evening shift, Carol Price, LPN heard the infusion pump
beep several times. She had
ignored it as she thought someone else was caring for the
patient. Diana Smith, RN was also
working the shift and had heard the pump beep several times.
She mentioned it to Jeffery. She
did not go into the room until about forty-five minutes later.
The patient testified that a nurse
came in and pressed some buttons and the pump stopped
beeping. She was groggy and not
sure who the nurse was or what was done.
Diana Smith responded to the patient’s call bell and found the
IV had dislodged for the patient's
vein. There was no evidence that the Mitomycin had gone into
the patient's tissue. Diana
immediately stopped the IV, notified the physician, and
provided care to the hand. The
documentation in the medical record indicates that there was an
infiltration to the IV.
The hospital was testing a new IV Infusion pump called SAFE-
INFUSE. The supervisory nurse
was Betty DePalma, RN. Betty took the pump off the unit. No
one made note of the pump’s
serial number as there were 6 in the hospital being used. There
was also another brand of

pumps being used in the hospital. It was called Brand X
infusion pump. Betty did not note the
name of the pump or serial number. The pump was not isolated
or sent to maintenance and
eventually the hospital decided not to use SAFE-INFUSE so the
loaners were sent back to the
company.
Betty and Dr. William Brady are the only ones that carry
malpractice insurance. The hospital
also has malpractice insurance.
Two weeks after the event, the patient developed necrosis of the
hand and required multiple
surgical procedures, skin grafting, and reconstruction. She had
permanent loss of function and
deformity in her third, fourth, and fifth fingers. The Claimant is
alleging that, because of this, she
is no longer able to perform as a conductor, for which she was
studying.
During the procedure for the skin grafting, the plastic surgeon,
Dr. William Brady, used a
dermatome that resulted in uneven harvesting of tissue and
further scarring in the patient's thigh
area where the skin was harvested.
The Risk Manger is Susan Post, J.D. who works in collaboration
with the Quality Assurance
director Amy Green. Amy had noted when doing chart reviews
over the last three months prior
to this incident that there were issues of short staffing and that
many nurses were working
double shifts, evenings and nights then coming back and
working the evening shift. She was in
the process of collecting data from the different units on this

observation. She also noted a
pattern of using float nurses to several units. Prior to this
incident the clinical nurse specialist,
Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS, was consulting with Susan Post
and Amy Green about the status
of staff education on this unit and what types of resources and
training was needed.
Case Study 2: Wrongful Death by Howard Carpenter on Behalf
of
Wilma Carpenter, Deceased
People Involved in Case:
Mrs. Wilma Carpenter-patient-deceased
Mr. Howard Carpenter-husband and plaintiff in wrongful death
suit
Mrs. Scale, RN, MS-nursing supervisor
Elizabeth Adelman, RN, recovery room nurse
Richard Washington, M.D.-orthopedic surgeon
Judy Gouda, RN, NP
Joseph Alsoff, LPN-post surgical unit nurse
Kelly Wheeler, RN-post surgical unit nurse
David Casler, LRT

Susan Post, JD-Risk Manager
Amy Green-Quality Assurance
Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS-education coordinator
Caring Memorial Hospital
Facts:
The plaintiff, Mrs. Carpenter was a 55-year-old woman who
underwent a total hip replacement
at Caring Memorial Hospital. The physician was Richard
Washington, M.D. Dr. Washington is
an orthopedic surgeon. His nurse practitioner is Judy Gouda,
RN, NP. Dr. Washington reviewed
the consent with Mrs. Carpenter prior to surgery. Joseph Alsoff,
LPN witnessed the consent, Mr.
Carpenter was present. Joseph does not remember the doctor
ever mentioning that death could
be a result of the surgery. The recovery room nurse is Elizabeth
Adelman, R.N. The respiratory
therapist is David Casler, LRT. The nurse on the post-surgical
unit was Kelly Wheeler, RN. The
supervising nurse was Mrs. Scale, RN, MS.
The patient had an epidural catheter for a post-operative pain
management, following an
episode of hypotension in the Recovery Room which was
treated with Ephedrine. Judy Gouda
made rounds on the patient in the Recovery Room after the
hypotensive event and vital signs
were stable. The patient, Mrs. Carpenter, was placed on a
medical surgical nursing unit with the
epidural. The nurse, Kelly, was assigned to the patient and had

not worked on that unit before,
but had worked in post-acute critical care units. The nurse's
assignment was to provide patient
care on the entire floor for that shift. There was also an LPN,
Joseph on the unit. It was a busy
day on the unit. Mrs. Carpenter was not the only post-operative
patient.
Kelly assessed the plaintiff upon admission, checked the IVs,
asked if the patient was in pain,
noted that the patient was responsive and understood where she
was and was stable. She then
left to care for other patients.
The licensed practical nurse, Joseph Alcoff, had been working
on the unit for several years. It
had been rumored that Joseph was an alcoholic. There was no
evidence that he had been
drinking on the unit. Approximately an hour after the patient
arrived on the unit, she was unable
to tolerate respiratory therapy that was ordered, and she became
nauseated and vomited. David
Casler administered the respiratory therapy. According to Kelly,
the registered nurse, ten
minutes after the vomiting episode, Joseph Alcoff, the LPN,
found the patient blue and
unresponsive and called a code. Joseph is the only person other
than the physician that carries
his own liability insurance. The hospital also has malpractice
insurance.
The code team responded, along with Kelly, the registered
nurse. Mrs. Carpenter was intubated
and cardiac resuscitation was initiated. The patient responded to
resuscitative efforts and she
was transferred to the intensive care unit. Subsequently, Mrs.

Carpenter did not do well, was
unresponsive, and declared brain dead and taken off the
respirator. She did not have a DNR in
place.
There is a conflict in testimony between Joseph the LPN and
Kelly the RN. Joseph indicated
that Kelly found the plaintiff to be unresponsive after the
vomiting episode and called the code.
The time elapsed between the vomiting episode and finding the
patient is in dispute. The final
diagnosis was anoxia encephalopathy due to the time lapse
between CPR being initiated. The
patient was eventually extubated, breathed independently for a
period of time, and then
subsequently expired.
The vital signs ordered by the physician were hourly. The
hypotensive episode in the recovery
room had not been reported to the registered nurse.
The Risk Manger is Susan Post, J.D. who works in collaboration
with the Quality Assurance
director Amy Green. Amy had noted when doing chart reviews
over the last three months prior
to this incident that the vital signs taken in the recovery room
were not charted, not done, or not
reported to the units. She was in the process of collecting data
from the different units on this
observation. She also noted a pattern of using float nurses to
several postoperative units. Prior

to this incident the clinical nurse specialist, Michael Parks, RN,
MS, CNS, was consulting with
Susan Post and Amy Green about the status of staff education
on these units and what types of
resources and training was needed.
DescriptionDirections:
MN 506 - Unit 9: Scoring Rubric Legal Malpractice Case Group
Paper [300 points total-230 for group paper; 40 for individual
participation & 30 APA & grammar]
Requirements
Unsatisfactory Does Not Meet Requirements
0-4 points
Underdeveloped/Limited-Meets Some Requirements
5-11 points
Satisfactory
12- 19 points
Exceptional Meet Requirements
20 points
Total Points
Liability issues
The assignment does not address any or all of this section.
The assignment contains some information on this area of focus,
but needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more
thoroughly.
Entry well-constructed and demonstrated basic connection to
the course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level
thinking (application or analysis).
Group project demonstrates substantial integration of course
materials and/or use of upper level thinking (legal synthesis of
malpractice case).

Parties involved and who should be sued
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Defenses of the parties
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Documents that the Plaintiff’s side will ask for and how they
will be used
thoroughly.

malpractice case).
Standards of care
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Duty, breach, damages and proximate cause
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Insurance issues
thoroughly.

malpractice case).
Risk management issues before and after the incident
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Documentation and mandatory reporting
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Who should write the incident report and what should it say?

thoroughly.
malpractice case).
The doctrine of Respondeat Superior and how it would apply
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
The issues surrounding informed consent
thoroughly.
malpractice case).

Preparation for court of the parties
thoroughly.
malpractice case).
Individual points for group work Requirements
0 points
5 points
Satisfactory
8 points
10 points
Total Points
Cooperates with group. Assists with assignments, makes
meetings, contributes to the paper and works to further the
interests of the group.
Does not cooperate with the group or does not participate.
Participates but does not put full efforts in or is disruptive to
the group.
Participates in group process.

Exceptional Meet Requirements.
B. Format
(15 points possible)
Unsatisfactory
0 poin1ts
Underdeveloped/Limited
4 point
Satisfactory
6 points
Exceptional
10 points
APA Format
There are >4 errors with APA format.
There are 3-4 errors with APA format.
There are no errors with APA format.
Citations
There are no references/citations.
Student appeals only to his/her own experiences to support main
point.
There is one reference/citation. Student incorporates the
work/experiences of other students, scholars.
There are 2+ references/citations. Student supports main
position with references to scholarly articles, course readings,
and experts.
Spelling/Grammar

There are > 4 errors with spelling/grammar.
There are 3-4 errors with spelling/grammar.
There are no errors with spelling/grammar.
Total raw points earned on Part B (format)
___/30
Total Points: (A +B +C) /300
___/300 points
MN 506 - Unit 5: Scoring RubricEthical Legal Dilemma
Advanced Practice Nursing Case Study
[300 points-240 for paper and 60 for APA & grammar]
A: Content (240 points possible)
0-5 points
5-15 points
Satisfactory
16- 29 points
30 points
Total Points
Create an ethical legal decision-making dilemma involving aan
advanced practice nurse in the field of education, informatics,
administration, or a nurse practitioner.

Missing most or all information related to this variable.
The assignment contains some of information on the topic, but
needs more clarity. Topic needs to be developed more
thoroughly.
Entry well-constructed and demonstrates connection to the
course materials, the required topic and/or upper-level thinking
(application or analysis).
Demonstrates substantial integration of course materials and/or
use of upper level thinking (ethical and legal synthesis of
dilemma).
Include one ethical principle and one law that would be violated
and whether the violation would constitute a civil or criminal
act based on facts in the law
thoroughly.
dilemma).
Construct a decision that would prevent violation of the ethical
principle and prevent the law from being violated
thoroughly.

dilemma).
Describe the legal principles and laws that apply to the ethical
dilemma
thoroughly.
dilemma).
Support the legal issues with prior legal cases or state or federal
statutes
thoroughly.
dilemma).
Analyze the differences between ethical and legal reasoning and
apply an ethical –legal reasoning model in the case study to
create a basis for a solution to the ethical-legal dilemma

thoroughly.
dilemma).
List three recommendations that will resolve advanced practice
nurses moral distress in the dilemma you have presented
thoroughly.
dilemma).
Based on the issue you presented, the rules of law, apply the
laws to you case and come up with a conclusion
thoroughly.

dilemma).
Total Points
___/240
B. Format
(30 points possible)
Unsatisfactory
0 poin1ts
Underdeveloped/Limited
8 point
Satisfactory
16 points
Exceptional
20 points
APA Format
There are >4 errors with APA format.
There are no errors with APA format.
Citations
There are no references/citations.
Student appeals only to his/her own experiences to support main
point.
There is one reference/citation. Student incorporates the
work/experiences of other students, scholars.

There are 2+ references/citations. Student supports main
position with references to scholarly articles, course readings,
and experts.
Spelling/Grammar
___/60
Total Points: (A +B) /300
___/ 300points
SCHOOL OF NURSING
MN506: Contract for Group Project
Unit 3 Assignment
(100 points)
Write as a group a 500 word essay. Describe the types of
contracts and the elements of a contractual agreement. How
does contractual law affect nurses working with employers or

physician groups? You may write your response here and have
one delegated student submit it in the assignment area. Two
references for the essay is required. See the grading rubric.
As group members Geni Adams, Jacqueline Christianson, Wendi
Hanna, Amy Kubler, Brenda Reed, Elizabeth Midiri assigned to
Group A, we agree to work together to complete the project on
time. We understand the requirements of the project include a
thorough discussion of the following issues:
1. Liability issues
2. Parties involved and who should be sued
3. Defenses of the parties
4. Documents that the Plaintiff’s side will ask for and how they
will be used
5. Standards of care
6. Duty, breach, damages and proximate cause
7. Insurance issues
8. Risk management issues before and after the incident
9. Documentation and mandatory reporting
10. Who should write the incident report and what should it
say?
11. The doctrine of Respondent Superior and how it would
apply
12. The issues surrounding informed consent

13. Preparation for court of the parties
We agree that each group member will be responsible for
overseeing group work during one week. Group members will
be responsible for each week as follows:
Unit 3 (submission of contract and essay into dropbox)
Jacqueline Christianson
Unit 4
Geni Adams
Unit 5
Brenda Reed
Unit 6
Wendi Hanna
Unit 7
Amy Kubler
Unit 8 (submission into discussion area)
Elizabeth Midiri
Unit 9 (final submission into dropbox)
Wendi Hanna
We have established these group rules:
All assignments will be turned into group by Saturday evening
for review and discussion. Any changes or concerns will be
voiced by Monday evening. Assignments will be posted first in
group A area under unit 1 prior to posting for group review.
Anyone not able to complete their portion on due assignment by
Saturday evening will notify group by Friday at 1200 (Central
Time) so work can be redistributed as needed to stay timely.
We have assigned these roles and responsibilities to individual
members:
Wendi First part of essay and topics 1-2
Liability and parties involved and who should be sued
Geni Second part of essay and topics 3-4
Defense of the parties and Documents of the plantiffs side will

ask for and how they will be used
Jacqueline Proofreads essay and final assignment and topics 5-
6
Standards of Care and Duty, breach, damages, and proximate
cause
Brenda Topics 7-9
Insurance Issues, Risk management issues before and after the
incident, Documentation and mandatory reporting
Amy Topics 10-11, compiles paper
Who should write the incident report and what should it say,
The doctrine of Respondeat Superior and how it should apply
Elizabeth Topics 12-13, edits for peer review
The issues surrounding informed consent, and Preparation of
court of the parties
All Group Members are responsible for reviewing the
assignment and responding on the discussion board with
changes to be made or confirmation that they find the
assignment acceptable as-is by Monday at 2359 (Central Time).
If a member of the group refuses to cooperate and impedes the
progress of the project we will take these actions in this order:
The classmate will first try to be contacted via discussion area,
then email. If student does not respond or is unable to finish
any of asked assignments, Professor Redden will be notified and
the remaining work will be evenly divided by remaining
students in Group A.
Group member email addresses are as follows:
Geni Adams – [email protected]
Jacqueline Christianson – [email protected]
Wendi Hanna – [email protected]

Amy Kubler – [email protected]
Elizabeth Midri –
Brenda Reed – [email protected]
Additional points of clarification:
All additional points needing clarified along the way will be
done so in the group discussion area under Unit 1.
MN 506 - Unit 9: Scoring Rubric Legal Malpractice Case Group
Paper [300 points total-230 for group paper; 40 for individual
participation & 30 APA & grammar]
Requirements
0-4 points
5-11 points
Satisfactory
12- 19 points
20 points
Total Points
Liability issues
thoroughly.
malpractice case).

___/30
Total Points: (A +B +C) /300
___/300 points

Updated June 2014 MN506 - Unit 9 Page 1 of 5 SCHOOL .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Updated June 2014 MN506 - Unit 9 Page 1 of 5 SCHOOL .docx

Similar to Updated June 2014 MN506 - Unit 9 Page 1 of 5 SCHOOL .docx (20)

More from dickonsondorris

More from dickonsondorris (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Updated June 2014 MN506 - Unit 9 Page 1 of 5 SCHOOL .docx