Anonymous Hospital, Inc. v. Jane Doe, Indiana Dept. of Insurance
2013 Ind. App. LEXIS 522
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Jane Doe, an in-patient at Anonymous Hospital’s psychiatric unit, was psychotic and received psychotropic medications while hospitalized after delusions and suicidal ideation.
- On January 9, 2008, Doe had sexual encounters with another patient (Marcus) while under the hospital’s care; a vaginal swab later tested positive for semen.
- Doe alleged she lacked capacity to consent because of her medical condition and the psychotropic drugs administered by hospital staff.
- Doe sued Anonymous Hospital for negligence and asked for a declaratory ruling that her claim is not governed by the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act (MMA); she obtained partial summary judgment on that issue.
- Anonymous Hospital appealed the interlocutory determination that the claim sounded in ordinary negligence rather than medical malpractice.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the complaint falls within the MMA because the claim challenges the propriety of medical treatment (prescribing/monitoring psychotropic drugs) that allegedly rendered Doe unable to consent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Doe’s claim falls outside the MMA (ordinary negligence) or within the MMA (medical malpractice) | Doe: hospital failed to restrain or monitor other patient; claim is premises/ordinary negligence akin to R.R.K. | Hospital: claim challenges medical care (medication/monitoring) and thus is governed by MMA | Held: Within MMA — allegation that prescribed meds rendered Doe incapable of consenting requires medical-standard proof and expert testimony |
Key Cases Cited
- Webb v. Jarvis, 575 N.E.2d 992 (Ind. 1991) (distinguishes torts arising independent of medical services from malpractice)
- Madison Ctr., Inc. v. R.R.K., 853 N.E.2d 1286 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (injuries caused by another patient on premises can be ordinary negligence when unrelated to care provided to plaintiff)
- Doe by Roe v. Madison Ctr. Hosp., 652 N.E.2d 101 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (look to substance of claim to determine MMA applicability)
- Pluard v. Patients Comp. Fund, 705 N.E.2d 1035 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (injury from detached surgical lamp was ordinary negligence because causation did not depend on medical judgment)
- Putnam Cnty. Hosp. v. Sells, 619 N.E.2d 968 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993) (claims causally connected to patient-provider relationship fall within MMA)