Was it malpractice on the part of the hospital to not conduct an MRI when I was unconscious?

She has a case, but not independent of yours. It's called loss of consortium.

Her claim would not be independent of yours rather, hers is what is referred to as a derivative claim for loss of consortium (a lovely old phrase!). In other words, she cannot bring her claim directly against the driver except through your claim for injuries. It may have been malpractice for the hospital not to have performed an MRI (although its doctors will defend themselves by saying that in their judgment an MRI wasn't needed), but I doubt there's a case there because I doubt you will be able to show that had you gotten an MRI sooner you would have ended up with a significantly better medical condition. Perhaps the brain injury would have been detected sooner, but you also have to prove that (1) treatment would have begun sooner; and (2) it would have avoided much of the injuries you are now suffering, at least to your brain. Note that you have two years from the date of the alleged malpractice to formally assert a claim for medical malpractice; otherwise, the claim will be time-barred forever. As a practical matter, I think it's best not to assert a claim for medical malpractice, because you have an opportunity to go after the driver who put you in the hospital in the first place, and because malpractice is foreseeable, that driver likely will be on the hook for whatever damages the hospital caused, even if the hospital (or its physicians) committed malpractice.

If you can find an ER specialist who will say under oath that the hospital ER screwed up by not conducting an MRI, then you can sue. Malpractice means that the professional acted (or failed to act), and such behavior was a "deviation from the standard of practice in the same or similar communities."

It takes a medical expert to get through the courthouse doors on medical malpractice cases. However, unless severe permanent injuries were incurred as a result of the failure to do the mri, it is probably not worth the time and effort as the cost of pursuing the claim would probably outweigh the potential recovery. However, all of the damages reasonably related to your accident would be a part of your claim against the truck driver, including those resulting from their failure to do an mri and your wife's potential claim. Your wife's claim, in Alabama, would be derivative of yours. In other words, she could not bring it separately. For that reason and the possibility that there may be a limited amount of funds to recover your claim, spouse's claims, called consortium claims, are not brought, usually, unless the damages to the injured spouse are extremely severe, such as paraplegia. Sometimes the spouse has to get a separate lawyer when the funds available for recovery are limited, unless a conflict of interest waiver is signed. Hope that helps.

No, she does not have a case.

In order to prove a medical malpractice case, a claimant must prove a failure to conform to accepted practice, resulting in an injury. A bad result is not enough, and if it is a "judgment call" by the doctor, there is no malpractice, even if the doctor made the wrong call. In your situation, I can't tell if the failure to take the MRI made you any the worse off than you would have been otherwise. You mention that "litigation is pending" against the other driver. If you are using that technical term correctly, that means you have a lawyer, and any personal injury lawyer worth his salt would have looked into the malpractice question. So, are you trying to second-guess your lawyer? Yes, your wife has what is called a "derrivative" cause of action, meaning that it derrives from your cause of action. The law recognizes that when one spouse is injured, both are affected. The damages are not exactly "pain and suffering" though, there are three elements: 1) Loss of society and companionship (her life has been disrupted by your injuries); 2) Loss of value of household services (you couldn't pack the boxes or help with 101 other things involved in moving, and that has a financial measure) and 3) Loss of consortium (sex). Theoretically, your wife's cause of action could be sued seperately, but it is rarely a good idea.

Hospitals don't pay much attention to head injuries. Don't know why. Ask your doctors. As far as your wife is concerned she may have a claim for what is called loss of consortium (google the idea) loss of affection, sexual services, etc. not very well thought of in NC but it is still on the books.