Prepare a medical malpractice case study- EduCare Community Living v. Celedon,

JOURNAL PROJECT OULINE 5

Journal on Project Outline

Oluwabukola Alimi

Southern New Hampshire University

Introduction

A patient at a day program operated by an intermediate care facility (ICF-MR) for the mentally retarded claimed she was sexually assaulted by another patient in the program. The patient filed suit against the ICF/MR claiming that it failed to protect her from harm because the door to a shed where the incident happened was not properly locked. The Corpus Christi Court of Appeals held the claims were health care liability claims because the allegations went to the failure to properly care for and supervise the patients. 

Parties- EduCare Community Living v. Celedon, No. 13- 08-00461-CV, 2009 WL 3210950 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2009, no pet.).

Facts- plaintiffs moved to dismiss the lawsuit based on appellees' failure to serve an expert report within 120 days of the filing of their petition as is required in all health care liability claims. Trial court denied plaintiffs' motion to dismiss which quickened interlocutory appeal.

Claims- The decisions made about the safety conditions at these facilities involve professional judgment, and when a patient is injured because of a lapse in this decision-making, a lawsuit pertaining to that injury is a health care liability claim. This sort of case will fall under negligence on the part of the nursing home. However, the patient claiming sexual assault was well aware of the fact that the facility is an intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded. Part II: Analysis

Issue- the Texas Supreme Court and courts of appeal have held that lawsuits based on assaults of patients challenging the standards of safety and protection of patients in nursing homes and other adult care facilities are health care liability claims covered by the expert report requirements of section 74.351

Rule- In nursing homes and other facilities that care for patients who need extensive assistance with nearly every aspect of their lives, the supervision of patients is considered by Texas courts to be an inseparable part of the services provided by these facilities. See Diversicare, 185 S.W.3d at 851; Harrison, 206 S.W.3d at 141. It is for this reason that a failure to supervise or train staff or a failure to supervise and assist patients is a departure from standards of safety that implicates chapter 74. EduCare is indeed this type of institution, and because appellees filed suit against plaintiffs, a health care institution as defined by the statute, the "first element" of a health care liability claim has been met.

Analysis- the analysis will also look into why ICF/MR are short staffed and less equipped than nursing homes/senior living and hospitals. Some of the main fact pattern to look out for is how the patient can prove that the facility did not provide accurate protection, despite knowing that several patients in the facility are mentally unbalanced and required round the clock monitoring; that includes tight security. This session will focus on why nursing homes are often faced with medical malpractice lawsuits and reasons they are short staffed. How was the plaintiff able to prove negligence on the part of the organization and laws that supported the claims?

Evidence- proof that supported the plaintiffs’ claims. Who was present when the incident took place and injury that was sustained from the incident? Doctor’s documentation of the impact the incident had on the plaintiff, did she suffer any loss?

Defenses- rules and laws that was applied during the case to support the appellant’s claim.

Ethical Issues- Did the institution act ethically, what was the standard of care given to the patients?

Conclusion- Why was Caledon right or wrong in pursuing this case? Did Educare go against the law and was the Court of Appeals right in holding the claim.

Part III: Variation

Analysis of Hypothetical- If the ICF/MR was able to present proof that Caledon intentionally put herself in harm’s way, the case would have probably be dismissed. Knowing or realizing that the back door was not properly locked, why did the patient remain in that spot?

References/Sources

Significant Cases (2009). Retrieved from: http://www.krogerlaw.com/SignificantCases.html

JUSTIA US Law (2009). Retrieved from http://law.justia.com/cases/texas/thirteenth-court-of-appeals/2009/18086.html