395 P.3d 698
Ariz.2017Background
- Sandra Shaw, a 74-year-old with multiple serious conditions, was admitted to Manor Care for skilled nursing and therapy; she required assistance with most daily activities and qualified as a "vulnerable adult."
- Shaw’s condition deteriorated in late April 2012; labs indicated early sepsis on April 30, but no new orders or treatment were given; she worsened on May 1 and died of sepsis hours later.
- Marika Delgado, Shaw’s sister and personal representative, sued Manor Care, Dr. Gordon Cuzner (Shaw’s treating physician), and related entities under the Adult Protective Services Act (APSA), alleging abuse and neglect causing injury/death.
- The superior court granted summary judgment for defendants applying the four-part McGill test and concluding Shaw’s sepsis was not "related to the problems that caused [her] incapacity."
- The court of appeals reversed, and the Arizona Supreme Court granted review to resolve APSA’s proper scope and the continuing validity of the McGill test.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether APSA actionable abuse requires McGill four-part test | Delgado: APSA requires only statutory elements (vulnerable adult, injury, caused by abuse, from a caregiver) | Defendants: McGill test must limit APSA to exclude ordinary medical malpractice and acute, unrelated conditions | Court: Abolished McGill test; APSA claim requires only the statutory four elements; legislature may amend if it wants further limits |
| Whether Shaw presented triable evidence of APSA abuse by Manor Care | Delgado: Nursing records and expert affidavits show failures to monitor/notify and to treat, causing harm | Manor Care: Any negligence related to sepsis was not tied to vulnerabilities that made Shaw an APSA victim | Court: Viewing evidence in Delgado’s favor, triable issues exist; summary judgment was erroneous |
| Whether Dr. Cuzner’s conduct can support an APSA claim | Delgado: Expert affidavit alleges failure to treat sepsis breached standard of care and contributed to death | Dr. Cuzner: Argues McGill-based limitation and other defenses (some not preserved for review) | Court: Summary judgment against Dr. Cuzner was erroneous on the arguments actually raised; remand to resolve admissibility and remaining issues |
| Whether prior amendments ratified McGill (legislative acquiescence) | Defendants: Legislative inaction after amendments indicates acquiescence to McGill | Delgado: No affirmative indication legislature adopted McGill; amendments unrelated | Court: Rejected acquiescence argument; doctrine inapplicable absent evidence legislature considered the judicial construction |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of McGill ex rel. McGill v. Albrecht, 203 Ariz. 525, 57 P.3d 384 (2002) (adopted a four-part test limiting APSA abuse claims)
- In re Estate of Winn, 214 Ariz. 149, 150 P.3d 236 (2007) (remedial statutes like APSA construed broadly to protect vulnerable adults)
- In re Estate of Wyatt, 235 Ariz. 138, 329 P.3d 1040 (2014) (statutory-construction principles for remedial statutes)
- Cornerstone Hosp. of Se. Ariz., L.L.C. v. Marner, 231 Ariz. 67, 290 P.3d 460 (App. 2012) (APSA claim viable for inadequate nursing/medical services causing harm)
- Ballesteros v. Am. Standard Ins. Co. of Wis., 226 Ariz. 346, 248 P.3d 193 (2011) (courts should not rewrite statutes to add requirements)
- Andrews v. Blake, 205 Ariz. 236, 69 P.3d 7 (2003) (standard for reviewing summary judgment)