Question

Dr. Lozano was sued for negligence by Andrade as a result of injuries to their baby during childbirth. Doctors Hospital was added as a defendant along with RGV Med, LLC under the theory that they was vicariously liable for Dr. Lozano’s negligence. Doctors Hospital was a Limited Partnership and RGV Med was its general partner. Lozano, who was a independent contractor with admitting privileges at Doctors Hospital, was also a limited partner of Doctors Hospital. Doctors Hospital and RGV moved for summary judgment on the theory that they are not liable for Lozano’s conduct because he was not acting within the scope of the partnership or with partnership authority when providing medical care to his patients.

Issue: Was Lozano acting within the scope of the partnership?

Answer 1

Dr. Lozano's conduct and the scope of the partnership are the main points of consideration in determining whether Doctors Hospital and RGV Med, LLC are liable for negligence.

Step-by-step explanation:

The issue in this case is whether Dr. Lozano was acting within the scope of the partnership formed by Doctors Hospital and RGV Med, LLC. In order to determine this, we need to understand the concept of vicarious liability. Vicarious liability holds an employer or principal responsible for the actions of their employees or agents if those actions were carried out within the scope of their employment or agency relationship.

In this case, Dr. Lozano was an independent contractor with admitting privileges at Doctors Hospital, but he was also a limited partner of Doctors Hospital. However, simply being a limited partner does not automatically make him an employee or agent of the partnership.

In order for Doctors Hospital and RGV Med, LLC to be held vicariously liable for Dr. Lozano's conduct, it must be established that he was acting within the scope of the partnership or with partnership authority. If Dr. Lozano was providing medical care to his patients within the scope of his independent contractor relationship, rather than as an agent of the partnership, the partnership would likely not be liable for his conduct.