EVERSON Et Al. v. PHOEBE SUMTER MEDICAL CENTER, INC. Et Al.; JORDAN v. EVERSON Et Al.
341 Ga. App. 182
Ga. Ct. App.2017Background
- In April 2008, Benjamin Everson presented to Phoebe Sumter Medical Center ER reporting hallucinations, hearing voices, accelerated/rambling speech, elevated vitals, and two weeks of psychiatric symptoms. Dr. Brian Jordan (independent contractor ER physician) examined and discharged him with a May 1 outpatient psychiatric appointment.
- Everson’s parents instead arranged travel to Duke for evaluation. On May 1, while en route, Everson exited a moving car, ran into traffic, and was killed.
- Plaintiffs (Everson’s parents and estate) sued the hospital and Jordan for medical malpractice, alleging misdiagnosis and failure to obtain psychiatric evaluation; they later added ordinary negligence claims against the hospital.
- Procedurally: the trial court denied plaintiffs’ request for discovery sanctions (refusing to strike the hospital’s answer), excluded plaintiffs’ expert testimony as to nurses under OCGA § 24-7-702, granted summary judgment to the hospital, and denied summary judgment to Jordan. Plaintiffs and Jordan appealed.
- On appeal the court affirmed the denial of sanctions, affirmed exclusion of the nurses-related expert testimony, affirmed summary judgment for the hospital (statute of limitations/repose and lack of admissible expert proof as to nurses), and affirmed denial of summary judgment to Jordan (genuine issues of breach and causation).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by refusing to strike hospital’s answer and enter default for alleged false discovery responses | Hospital intentionally provided misleading discovery about on-staff psychiatrists and post-tornado policies, warranting default sanction | Initial incorrect responses were unintentional, corrected when discovered; drastic sanction unwarranted | No abuse: trial court credited evidence the error was inadvertent and sanctions were inappropriate (sanction denial affirmed) |
| Admissibility of plaintiff experts’ opinion re: nurses’ standard of care under OCGA § 24-7-702 | Expert (EM physician) opined nurses breached duty by failing to challenge physician’s diagnosis and preventing discharge | Testimony impermissibly intruded on scope of medical practice and exceeded permissible nursing responsibilities under Georgia law | Exclusion affirmed: expert opinion conflicted with statutory scope of nursing practice and Rule 702 gatekeeping discretion was not abused |
| Whether plaintiffs’ ordinary negligence claims against hospital survived statute of limitation/statute of repose | Plaintiffs contended amended complaint alleged ordinary negligence claims separate from professional malpractice | Hospital argued ordinary negligence claims were time-barred and had been correctly dismissed | Affirmed: plaintiffs failed to argue or cite authority to show trial court erred; time-bar and repose barred those claims |
| Whether Jordan entitled to summary judgment on malpractice (breach and causation) | Plaintiffs: Jordan misdiagnosed, failed to obtain psychiatric consult, and that breach proximately caused death; expert supported causation | Jordan: care was emergency medical care (gross negligence standard) or, alternatively, no breach or foreseeable causation; parents’ decision to go to Duke was intervening cause | Denial of summary judgment affirmed: genuine factual disputes exist about whether care met emergency-care definition, breach occurred, and whether negligence proximately caused death; causation for jury decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Doctors Hosp. of Augusta, LLC v. Alicea, 299 Ga. 315 (addresses summary judgment review standard)
- Dubois v. Brantley, 297 Ga. 575 (Rule 702 admissibility principles)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (trial court gatekeeper role for non-scientific expert testimony)
- Scapa Dryer Fabrics v. Knight, 299 Ga. 286 (expert testimony exclusion where opinion conflicts with statutory scope of practice)
- Nguyen v. Southwestern Emergency Physicians, P. C., 298 Ga. 75 (definition/analysis of "emergency medical care" under OCGA § 51-1-29.5)
- Zwiren v. Thompson, 276 Ga. 498 (elements of medical malpractice and standards for causation proof)
- Frady v. Irvin, 245 Ga. 307 (deference to trial court findings in discovery-sanction rulings)