## Facts

- A private hospital in Washington, D.C. concluded that a long-term patient no longer required acute hospital care and could be treated in a nursing home.
- After discussions with the patient’s husband, the hospital sent a formal written demand that arrangements be made to transfer the patient out of the hospital.
- The husband refused and insisted the patient remain at the hospital indefinitely, stating she should stay there for the rest of her life, and offered to pay any charges.
- The hospital filed a civil action seeking injunctive relief requiring the patient’s removal, alleging that her continued presence after demand constituted a trespass.
- The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint.

## Issues

1. Whether a patient’s continued presence in a private hospital becomes a trespass after the hospital demands that the patient leave.
2. Whether a private hospital may obtain injunctive relief to terminate that continuing occupation when monetary damages would be inadequate, even if the patient is willing to pay.
3. Whether the availability of legal actions such as ejectment or forcible entry and detainer bars equitable relief under these circumstances.

## Decision

- The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
- The court held that, after the hospital’s demand for departure, the patient’s continued presence constituted a trespass.
- The court held that damages would be inadequate, and an injunction could be sought to stop the continuing trespass.
- The court recognized a private hospital’s right to discontinue keeping a patient who no longer needs hospital-level care and its obligation not to permit hospital facilities to be used as long-term nursing-home accommodations.

## Legal Principles

- A license to remain on private property ends upon a clear demand to leave; continued occupation thereafter constitutes trespass.
- Equity may enjoin a continuing or repeated trespass when a remedy at law (including damages) is inadequate.
- The existence of other legal remedies does not foreclose injunctive relief where ongoing occupation and inadequacy of damages justify equitable intervention.
- A private hospital may control the use of its facilities and may refuse continued hospitalization when continued occupancy would divert hospital resources from their intended medical purpose.

## Conclusion

The court permitted a private hospital’s injunction action to proceed, ruling that after a demand to transfer a patient who no longer needed acute care, the patient’s continued stay could be treated as a continuing trespass for which damages were inadequate, making equitable relief available.


Lucy Webb Hayes Nat’l Training Sch. for Deaconesses & Missionaries v. Geoghegan, 281 F. Supp. 116 (D.D.C. 1967)