CARTER v. VISTACARE, LLC (Two Cases)
335 Ga. App. 616
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Cantrell (later substituted by administrator Carter) sued VistaCare over hospice care provided in 2009–2010, alleging fraud, battery, and negligence; an earlier suit (2011 Complaint) was filed and later voluntarily dismissed during trial in 2014.
- Carter filed a new complaint in November 2014 asserting fraudulent inducement, battery, and negligence based on allegations that VistaCare improperly changed doctor’s orders to hospice and administered morphine, causing harm and hospitalization.
- The trial court (First Order) dismissed the battery and negligence claims but allowed the fraud claim to proceed; later the court granted summary judgment for VistaCare on fraud (Final Order).
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals treated the motion to dismiss as converted to summary judgment (parties had relied on extra-pleading materials) and reviewed de novo.
- The court affirmed dismissal of battery (statute-of-limitations/renewal issue and failure to designate portions of prior record on appeal) and affirmed dismissal of negligence for failure to file an expert affidavit under OCGA § 9-11-9.1, concluding the claims involved professional medical judgments (e.g., morphine administration).
- The court reversed the summary judgment on the fraud claim because the trial court abused its discretion in denying Carter’s motion to withdraw deemed admissions by applying the wrong legal standard; remanded for reconsideration under OCGA § 9-11-36(b).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether motion to dismiss was converted to summary judgment without proper notice | Carter: court converted motion by considering outside materials and failed to give 30-day notice | VistaCare: parties treated motion as converted; Carter responded and relied on same materials | Court: Carter waived formal notice by relying on the prior complaint; no reversible error |
| Whether battery claim in 2014 Complaint relates back to 2011 Complaint (statute of limitations) | Carter: 2011 pleadings contained facts sufficient to assert battery; renewal tolls limitations | VistaCare: 2011 suit did not assert battery; new cause of action cannot enlarge original pleadings | Court: Battery is a new cause of action; does not relate back; affirm dismissal |
| Whether negligence claim required an expert affidavit under OCGA § 9-11-9.1 | Carter: claim is ordinary negligence for failing to follow doctor’s orders, not professional malpractice | VistaCare: injuries resulted from professional medical decisions (medication/treatment) requiring expert proof | Court: Claims concern medical judgment (administration of morphine); expert affidavit required; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether trial court erred in denying motion to withdraw deemed admissions and granting summary judgment on fraud | Carter: failure to answer requests for admission should not bar withdrawal; she proffered evidence and reasons; merits should be considered | VistaCare: requests were deemed admitted; summary judgment proper based on admissions | Court: Trial court applied wrong legal standard and misallocated burdens under OCGA § 9-11-36(b); denial was abuse of discretion; reversed and remanded for proper analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. Multibank 2009-1 RES-ADC Venture, LLC, 317 Ga. App. 264 (discussing conversion of motion to dismiss into summary judgment and notice requirement)
- Morrell v. Wellstar Health System, Inc., 280 Ga. App. 1 (party may waive formal notice of conversion by acquiescing to submission of evidence)
- Petkas v. Grizzard, 252 Ga. 104 (trial court may take judicial notice of prior record; appellant must designate portions for appeal)
- Ambrose v. Saint Joseph’s Hosp. of Atlanta, Inc., 325 Ga. App. 557 (distinguishing ordinary negligence from professional malpractice; expert affidavit requirement)
- Painter v. Wellstar Health Sys., Inc., 288 Ga. App. 659 (nurse’s independent medical judgment transforms claim into professional malpractice requiring expert testimony)
- Pattman v. Mann, 307 Ga. App. 413 (treatment timing and administration issues present medical questions requiring expert proof)
- Parham v. Weldon, 333 Ga. App. 744 (standard of review for denial of motion to withdraw admissions)
- Sayers v. Artistic Kitchen Design LLC, 280 Ga. App. 223 (movant need not show providential cause to withdraw admissions; apply two-prong test of OCGA § 9-11-36(b))