Published on:

Gilloon v. Hamana, Inc. (100 Nev. 518, 687 P.2d 80)

Nevada-elderly-man-abuse-nursing-home-300x200Articles: Nevada

Gilloon v. Hamana, Inc. (100 Nev. 518, 687 P.2d 80)

CASE:
Gilloon v. Hamana, Inc. (100 Nev. 518, 687 P.2d 80)
PARTIES:
Plaintiff (Appellee) – Richard Gilloon, Administrator of the estate of Winifred Gilloon (Deceased)
Defendant (Appellant) – Humana, Inc., dba Sunrise Hospital
COURT:
Supreme Court of Nevada (1984)
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:

On August 13, 1981, Plaintiff filed a wrongful death action against defendant stemming from the death of his mother, Winifred Gilloon. Defendant moved for a dismissal based on the statute of limitations. The district court granted the motion. Plaintiff appealed.

SUMMARY OF FACTS:

Winifred Gilloon underwent a total knee replacement surgery in January of 1976 at Sunrise Hospital. While at Sunrise, Winifred developed bedsores. The bedsores worsened, and for the next few years she was transferred to a series of hospitals and nursing homes. In September of 1979, Winifred’s son (Plaintiff) placed her in Moffitt Hospital in San Francisco, where, for the first time, she was properly diagnosed and treated. Winifred was still, however, experiencing complications that ultimately required surgery. Winifred died as a result of the surgery on October 8, 1979.

OUTCOME AT TRIAL:

The district court granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss, finding that the term “injury” in the statute of limitations referred to the injuries experienced by the decedent, and thus, Plaintiff was barred by a 2- year statute of limitations.

ISSUES ON APPEAL:

Did the court err in interpreting the term “injury” to refer to that sustained by the decedent, rather than the injury sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of the decedent’s death?

SUPREME COURT HOLDINGS:
Yes
RELEVANT APPLICATION OF LAW:

“The right of action is not concerned with the wrong done to the decedent but only with the wrong done to the heirs through the decedent’s death; consequently, it has no existence before the death of the decedent has occurred.

  • Perry v. Tonopah Mining Co., 13 F.2d 865 (D.Nev.1915)

Client Reviews

He did a tremendous job on our case and I can see why he's earned the praise he has from clients and peers. Shawna E.
★★★★★