## Facts

- A four-month-old infant developed diarrhea and fever and was treated over several days by private physicians with prescribed medication.
- On a Wednesday when the family’s doctors were unavailable, the parents brought the infant to a private hospital’s emergency ward, reporting two nights without sleep, a continuously high temperature (about 102), and diarrhea.
- The emergency ward nurse refused to provide treatment because the infant was under a private physician’s care and hospital rules barred treatment absent a “frank indication of emergency” unless the attending doctor was consulted.
- The nurse did not examine the infant or obtain basic vital information (e.g., temperature) and could not reach the infant’s doctors.
- The parents returned home; the infant died later that afternoon of bronchial pneumonia.
- The estate administrator sued for wrongful death, alleging negligent refusal to treat.

## Issues

1. Whether a private, tax-exempt hospital receiving public funds has a general legal duty to accept and treat members of the public who seek emergency care.
2. Whether the evidence could support a finding of an “apparent emergency” such that the hospital’s refusal to examine or treat the infant could be negligent, making summary judgment inappropriate.

## Decision

- The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the hospital’s motion for summary judgment and remanded for trial.
- The court rejected the view that tax benefits and public funding alone convert a private hospital into a “quasi-public” institution with a general duty to accept all emergency patients.
- The court recognized a limited duty: a private hospital operating an emergency ward open to the public may not arbitrarily refuse care to a person presenting with an apparent emergency.
- Whether the infant’s condition presented an apparent emergency and whether the refusal (including failure to examine) was unreasonable were jury questions.

## Legal Principles

- Absent statute, a private hospital generally has no broad common-law obligation to accept every person seeking admission or treatment.
- Tax-exempt status and receipt of public funds do not, by themselves, impose a universal public-duty-to-admit on a private hospital.
- When a private hospital maintains an emergency ward and holds it out to the public, it may assume a limited negligence-based duty not to refuse treatment unreasonably when the patient’s condition appears to be an emergency.
- The existence of an “apparent emergency,” and the reasonableness of the hospital’s response to the presented symptoms, are typically fact questions for the jury when supported by record evidence.

## Conclusion

The court held that private hospitals generally may select their patients, but operating an emergency ward open to the public can create a limited duty not to refuse care arbitrarily in an apparent emergency; because a jury could find such an emergency and an unreasonable refusal here, summary judgment was properly denied.


Wilmington Gen. Hosp. v. Manlove, 174 A.2d 135 (Del. 1961)