During the COVID-19 pandemic, people admitted to healthcare facilities faced an increased risk of harm due to the likelihood of the spread of the disease. As such, the government passed laws largely granting immunity to such facilities during the pandemic. The immunity was not all-encompassing, however, as demonstrated by a recent New York ruling in which the court declined to dismiss claims against a hospital under the EDTPA. If you were hurt by inadequate medical care, it is wise to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding your potential claims.
Factual and Procedural Background
It is alleged that the plaintiff, an elderly woman, was admitted to the defendant’s hospital in March 2020 with cellulitis in her right leg and other health conditions, including deep vein thrombosis and dementia. She had also suffered a recent fall and was diagnosed with a possible acetabular fracture. During her hospital stay, the medical staff conducted various assessments, including Braden Scale evaluations, to monitor the risk of skin breakdown. Despite preventive measures, including repositioning and using specialized equipment, the plaintiff was discharged in early April 2020 without any documented skin breakdowns.
Reportedly, however, upon her admission to another facility the following day, multiple pressure ulcers and skin issues were recorded, leading the plaintiff to claim that these injuries were caused by the hospital’s negligence. The plaintiff and her power of attorney filed a medical malpractice lawsuit, alleging that the hospital failed to properly prevent and treat the pressure ulcers. In response, the defendant hospital sought summary judgment, claiming immunity under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act (EDTPA) due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
COVID-19 Related Immunity
The court first addressed the defendant hospital’s argument that it was immune from liability under the EDTPA, which provided protection to healthcare facilities during the pandemic. The hospital argued that the plaintiff’s care was affected by the strain imposed by the pandemic, citing staffing shortages, documentation difficulties, and altered care protocols. However, the court concluded that the hospital failed to demonstrate conclusively that its treatment of the plaintiff was impacted by the pandemic, denying the claim of immunity under both the EDTPA and the executive order.
Regarding the medical malpractice claims, the court examined whether the hospital had met the standard of care in preventing the development of pressure ulcers. The hospital’s expert opined that the care provided, including frequent evaluations and the use of appropriate preventive measures, was within the standard of care and that the plaintiff’s ulcers were inevitable due to her underlying conditions.
The plaintiff’s opposition, supported by a nurse consultant’s affidavit, argued that the hospital failed to properly assess the plaintiff’s condition and did not take necessary steps to prevent the ulcers. The court, however, found that the nurse consultant was not qualified to give a medical opinion on the relevant standard of care and that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. As a result, the court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the medical malpractice claims as well as the claims for negligence and gross negligence.
Meet with a Trusted Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
If you suffered harm because of the negligence of a healthcare facility, you may have grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims, and you should meet with an attorney as soon as possible. At DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers, our trusted Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys can inform you of your options and help you to pursue the best outcome possible under the facts of your case. You can reach us through our form online or by calling us at 833-247-8427 to arrange a meeting.