Are you trying to imply that 78-yr-old blind women CAN’T have hunky young boyfriends? You agist, blindist bastard!
The nurse could have smoothed things over if she had her young daughters deliver some fresh baked cookies to the woman’s home. 
with a late noc delivery… 
Not the husband- the son, who was also under the impression that it was his father who had died. According to the article, they chose not to tell the husband about the mix-up, due to their concerns of the effect it would have on his health.
ralph, every once in a while, I think you’re starting to improve - you occasionally ask an interesting question - then something like this comes along.
I would gladly pay the Chicago Reader $14.95, hell, they can double it, $29.90, in order to puchase for you this custom title: The SDMB’s stupidest poster.
Tell that to my friend Mr. McGreg, who now has a leg for an arm and an arm for a leg.
Um…is the son blind, too? I know, I know, I should reread the article.
No thanks.
There is something about this story that just doesn’t add up. This seems so over the top for a simple mistake. And it was not a life-threatening mistake. It’s a publicity nightmare and should be investigated and dealt with, but it’s not in the same league as a surgical error or medical error.
That’s false, malicious, and libelous. I intend to sue you for damages on behalf of a class consisting of all the lawyers on the SDMB.
[Not really. But you really are an idiot.]
What about those of us who just play lawyer on the SDMB? Surely we should get something.
Enjoy,
Steven
Honestly, what is there to investigate? SOmeone was confused about who the man in the room was, or about who the visitors were, or simply pointed to the wrong room. Just a fuckup.
No investigation needed, AFAICT.
Sam
Where do I sign? (No need to quibble as to whether he is an idiot, as you phrase it, or a moron, as I phrase it.)
Anyway, my dad died with some other patient’s dentures in his mouth, but since his estate was never sued over it, I won’t sue the hospital for mistakenly switching the dentures. I hope that does not mean I have to give up being a lawyer.
Surely.
You can think he’s an idiot too!
While we are waiting for shite-for-brains to come up with a single lawyer on the SDMB who believes that frivolous lawsuits don’t exist, let’s have a frivolous musical interlude. Warm up your vocal cords, and follow the bouncing ball to the tune of “Oh Come All Ye Faithful”:
Why are we wait-ing?
Why-y are we wait-ing?
Why are we wai-ait-ing?
Oh why do we wait?
Why [damn, that was a high note to try to hit] are we wait-ing?
We could be masturba-at-ing!
Oh why-y are we wait-ing?
Oh why-y are we waint-ing?
Oh why-y are we wait-ing?
Oh why do we wait?
Sounds grand, but I’m banking on defendant being judgment-proof.
I’m surprised I’m the first lawyer here to make this request, but … cite?
Oh, and Muffin, you owe me a clean copy of the 2005 NJ Rules of Professional Conduct, as my old one is now covered with Dr. Pepper. Your song was hysterical.
I can always garnish his allowance.
I wonder how much a tin-foil hat will get in a sheriff’s auction?
Coincidentally, today I received notification of the opposition posting security for costs following a motion finding their matter being frivolous and vexatious. Sweet!
Ralph, do you realize that your ongoing and unfounded attacks against lawyers are the epitome of being frivolous and vexatious?
It’s an old rubgy party song. Once it get’s in your head, you have to take care not to start humming it in motions court.
Well that particular tin-hat is rather famous in certain circles. I’d offer all the way up to $40, maybe $50.