Court of Appeals Carefully Distinguishes Medical Malpractice From Ordinary Negligence In Case Resulting In Wrongful Arrest – Recent Blog Posting by Michael Manfredi
Recent blog posting by Michael Manfredi.
After writing a prescription for 120 pills of hydrocodone, Tami Carter’s doctor decided to change the quantity from 120 to 180.
When she took the prescription to Walgreens, an employee assumed that Ms. Carter altered the prescription and called her doctor’s office to verify the prescription. The on-call physician, a different person than the prescribing doctor, was not aware of the change and did not verify if his partner had done so.
When Ms. Carter returned to Walgreens, she was arrested on the spot.
She filed two claims: one against the prescribing physician for altering the prescription rather than writing a new one; the other against the medical practice for failing to verify the change.
The Court of Appeals dismissed the claim against her doctor, finding that the claim called into question his professional judgment in altering the quantity of pills prescribed, and that Ms. Carter did not attach an expert affidavit to her complaint as required in Georgia for a medical malpractice case. The Court reiterated that “[the] resolution of whether an act or omission sounds in simple negligence or medical malpractice depends on whether the conduct…involved a medical judgment.” Her claim against the practice, on the other hand, did not suffer the same fate.
The Court found that failing to make an effort to verify the prescription, or having a procedure in place to do so, did not involve professional skill or judgment. Thus her claim against the practice was permitted to go forward.
There have been a number of cases involving the distinction between ordinary negligence and medical malpractice recently. While hospitals and many large medical groups have in-house counsel to help guide and counsel practice procedures in order to avoid these types of cases from ever arising, most of the smaller medical practices do not have that luxury. It would be wise to pay attention to these types of decisions as they come out as they tend to be very fact-intensive, and can help prevent avoidable claims against the practice.
*The case is Carter v. Cornwell, 2016 Ga. App. LEXIS 528 (Sept. 21, 2016).
Please click here for more information on our Health Law and Regulation Update Blog.