Buchanan v. Hesse
521 F. Supp. 3d 348
| S.D.N.Y. | 2021Background
- Cydney Buchanan, a 17‑year‑old, was admitted to Arms Acres’ detox unit on Nov. 10, 2015; she was found unresponsive the night of Nov. 11–12 and died after transport to the hospital.
- Arms Acres employed one medical doctor in 2015: Dr. Frederick Hesse was the facility’s medical director and attending physician but did not personally treat or document Cydney, and testified he never met or was called about her.
- Initial assessments and medication orders at Arms Acres were typically performed by physician assistants or nurse practitioners; nursing/milieu staff observed Cydney vomit twice and later found her unresponsive; facility AED pads were incompatible and the AED failed to operate.
- Plaintiff settled with Arms Acres and other defendants; Dr. Hesse remained the sole defendant, sued for medical malpractice, negligent supervision, common‑law negligence, and punitive damages.
- Dr. Hesse produced an expert finding no negligence and no doctor–patient relationship; plaintiff’s expert criticized Arms Acres’ staff care but did not opine that Dr. Hesse breached an individual duty.
- The Court granted summary judgment for Dr. Hesse, dismissing all substantive claims and punitive damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Medical malpractice — duty/causation | Hesse, as medical director and via chart notation (“VO per Dr. Hesse”), was involved and thus liable | Hesse had no doctor–patient relationship with Cydney, no contact, and his expert found no deviation from standard care | Summary judgment for Hesse; malpractice claim dismissed |
| Negligent supervision | Hesse was negligent in managing medical and non‑medical staff | No evidence any employee acted outside scope of employment; supervisory claim unavailable where conduct within scope | Dismissed — no viable negligent supervision claim |
| Common‑law negligence — individual duty to promulgate policies | As medical director, Hesse was personally responsible for facility medical policies and care | Regulations do not clearly impose an individual duty on medical directors; court should not create such a duty absent precedent | Court declined to impose an individual duty based on OASAS/SAMHSA regs; claim dismissed |
| Punitive damages | Sought on the substantive claims | Punitive damages are derivative of substantive claims | Dismissed as parasitic once substantive claims were dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (genuine issue/materiality standard for summary judgment)
- Estiverne v. Esernio‑Jenssen, 581 F. Supp. 2d 335 (elements of medical malpractice under New York law)
- I.M. v. United States, 362 F. Supp. 3d 161 (physician–patient relationship may be a jury question)
- Hamilton v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 96 N.Y.2d 222 (prudential limits on imposing common‑law duties)
- Yong Wen Mo v. Gee Ming Chan, 17 A.D.3d 356 (punitive damages are parasitic on substantive claims)