Senior Trial Partner Rosaleen T. McCrory and Partner Elizabeth J. Sandonato successfully secured summary judgment in a case involving the care rendered to the plaintiff’s decedent, a single 88-year-old male, during admission at MCB’s client hospital, which spanned 11/5/13-12/4/13. The decedent’s medical history included for dementia, hypertension, kidney disease, seizures, cerebral aneurysm and heart failure. He was a long-term resident of the non-moving co-defendant nursing home and was transferred to our client hospital for evaluation of abdominal pain and fever. He was diagnosed with a UTI and sepsis/acute cholecystitis and underwent a PEG placement on 11/29/13. The decedent was also incontinent of bowel/bladder. On admission, the initial assessment was negative for skin breakdown.
During his hospital stay, the decedent developed four Stage II pressure ulcers on the coccyx, bilateral buttocks, and scrotum, all of which were noted to be present at discharge. Upon re-admission to the co-defendant nursing home on12/4/13, an initial nursing assessment identified an unstageable sacral pressure ulcer measuring 7 x 6 cm and an unstageable right heel pressure ulcer measuring 3 x 3 cm. Three weeks later, the decedent was admitted to anon-moving co-defendant hospital from 12/15/13-12/27/13 and again from1/22/14-3/3/14, before being transferred back to the nursing home where he died on 3/6/14. The co-defendants’ records reflect that between 12/27/13-1/22/14,the decedent may have developed seven pressure ulcers, and as of 3/4/14, he had23 pressure ulcers/alterations in skin integrity.
The Order documented, upon the motion papers and oral argument, that the motion by MCB’s client hospital seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint and related relief was granted in its entirety. The Court ruled that we established a prima facie case, demonstrating that our client hospital did not deviate or depart from acceptable hospital practice and that there is no causal connection between plaintiff’s claims of malpractice and the decedent’s claimed injuries. The record evidence established that MCB’s client hospital properly treated the decedent’s pressure ulcers and other problems. Our client-hospital records revealed that appropriate interventions were provided including repositioning at proper intervals and use of a specialty mattress. Much of our client defendant’s prima facie entitlement was contained within our expert physician's Affirmation. Moreover, the record evidence failed to establish that defendant engaged in carelessness, recklessness, or gross negligence.
The burden shifted to plaintiff to establish material issues of fact, which he failed to do. The plaintiff's expert did not assess the issue of the standard of care with respect to the specific facts of the decedent’s entire condition upon entry to the hospital and during his stay. Allegations made by the plaintiff's expert were refuted by documentary evidence. The plaintiff raised new theories of liability not asserted in the Bill of Particulars and there was an insufficient rebuttal of the wrongful death cause of action and the res ipsa loquitur claims. Additionally, no wanton indifference was shown to support any claims of gross negligence and punitive damages.