Bronx Hospital Can't Be Held Liable for Patient's Suicide, Appeals Panel Rules
Citing the treating physicians' deposition testimony and extensive medical records, the First Department panel wrote that in response to hospital questioning, the patient consistently denied having suicidal thoughts or ideation while stating that his anxiety stemmed in part from an uncomfortable living situation.
November 28, 2018 at 05:38 PM
3 minute read
A Bronx hospital can't be held liable for causing the death of a patient with anxiety disorder who committed suicide soon after being discharged, because the patient had consistently denied to doctors having suicidal thoughts or ideas, a state appeals court has ruled.
An Appellate Division, First Department panel also wrote in its decision Tuesday—which affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the medical malpractice complaint—that the “plaintiff's expert's opinion that, given the circumstances surrounding decedent's presence in [Lincoln Medical Center's] emergency department for psychiatric evaluation, the decision to discharge him led to his death, is speculative,” citing Park v. Kovachevich.
The patient, unnamed in the decision, had undergone a procedure at Lincoln Hospital Center's gastrointestinal clinic, when he was found crying in the hospital and saying he was depressed, the panel wrote. He was transferred to the hospital's emergency department for psychiatric evaluation, where he was diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, prescribed an anti-anxiety medication, scheduled for a follow-up appointment and discharged later the same day, the panel added.
In writing that Lincoln Medical Center, part of defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corp., and related defendants had established prima facie that they hadn't departed “from good and accepted medical practice” when treating and releasing the patient, the panel pointed to both treating physicians' testimony and a defense psychiatric expert's testimony.
Citing the treating physicians' deposition testimony and extensive medical records, the unanimous panel wrote that, in response to hospital questioning, the patient consistently denied having suicidal thoughts or ideation while stating that his anxiety stemmed in part from an uncomfortable living situation.
The defense psychiatric expert had opined that the defendants had complied with accepted professional standards of psychiatric care and made an appropriate discharge, because the patient had denied multiple times that he had any suicidal or homicidal ideation, didn't present a danger to himself or others, didn't present with a sudden psychiatric condition, demonstrated good insight and impulse control, and displayed sincere concern for his own well-being, the panel wrote.
At the same time, the panel, comprised of Justices Sallie Manzanet-Daniels, Peter Tom, Troy Webber and Jeffrey Oing, noted that plaintiff Altagracia Morillo—who had an unspecified connection to the decedent—“failed to raise an issue of fact, notwithstanding plaintiff's submission of the affidavit of the decedent's girlfriend, who accompanied him to LHC's emergency department and averred that defendants never inquired as to suicidal ideation.”
The panel's decision affirmed the 2015 ruling of Bronx Supreme Court Justice Douglas McKeon to grant Lincoln Hospital Center's and related defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Nicholas Paolucci, a spokesman at the city Law Department—which represented defendants, as New York City Health and Hospitals Corp. is a municipal healthcare system—said in email that the First Department “was legally correct in not holding HHC liable for this tragic incident.”
Aleksey Feygin, an attorney with Mark M. Basichas & Associates in Manhattan, represented Morillo, and could not be reached for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSnapshot Judgement: The Case Against Illustrated Indictments
Read the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readEx-NYC Mayor de Blasio Must Pay $475K Fine for NYPD’s Presidential Campaign Security
3 minute readAlston & Bird Adds M&A, Private Equity Team From McDermott in New York
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Pa. Superior Court: Sorority's Interview Notes Not Shielded From Discovery in Lawsuit Over Student's Death
- 2Kraken’s Chief Legal Officer Exits, Eyes Role in Trump Administration
- 3DOT Nominee Duffy Pledges Safety, Faster Infrastructure Spending in Confirmation Hearing
- 4'Younger and Invigorated Bench': Biden's Legacy in New Jersey Federal Court
- 5'Every Single Judge on Board': First-Impression Case Revived
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250