Grassie v. Roswell Hospital Corp.
150 N.M. 283
N.M. Ct. App.2010Background
- Grassie died within two hours of ER admission at Eastern New Mexico Medical Center; suit alleged medical negligence, negligent credentialing (hiring), and UP A deception claim; district court allowed all theories to go to the jury; jury awarded compensatory damages for medical negligence, a UPA damage award, and two punitive awards ($10,000,000 each) tied to medical negligence and negligent hiring; Hospital appeals the negligent hiring portion and the punitive damages on various grounds; Court affirms the medical negligence and UPA damages, but reverses negligent hiring damages (compensatory and punitive) for lack of proper expert proof; affirmation of other rulings includes denial of third-party Chaves joinder.
- Court noted no challenge to compensatory damages for medical negligence but did challenge the negligent hiring claim and argued punitive damages for negligent hiring were improperly supported.
- Court applied Clay v. Ferrellgas to evaluate punitive damages; concluded the evidence supported punitive damages for medical negligence but not for negligent hiring.
- Trial record showed significant communication and documentation failures in ER team, including failure to review chest x-ray and delays in treating high blood pressure.
- Court concluded expert testimony was required to prove the standard of care for negligent credentialing; without such expert proof, negligent hiring damages must be reversed.
- Overall, the court affirmed the ER medical negligence and UPA awards, reversed negligent hiring damages, and denied Chaves Group joinder.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Viability of Clay cumulative conduct theory | Grassie argues Clay supports punitive damages for employer despite no direct managerial proof. | Hospital asserts Clay is not viable where UJI 13-1827 omits cumulative conduct. | Clay viable; instruction not reversible on this ground. |
| Accuracy of punitive damages instruction per Clay | Clay-based instruction properly conveyed employer culpable mental state. | Instruction misstates Clay theory. | Instruction sustained; error not preserved for reversal. |
| Proximate cause by nurses and Clay aggregation | Nurses' conduct should be considered in aggregate to assess employer intent. | Nurses' conduct not proximate; not aggregateable. | Clay may apply; nurses' lack of proximate causation does not bar aggregate analysis. |
| Negligent hiring claim needs expert proof | Ordinary negligence standard suffices; expert proof not required. | Negligent credentialing requires expert testimony. | Negligent hiring reversed due to lack of expert proof. |
| UPA claim viability against hospital | Advertising and conduct misleading; actionable under UPA. | Medical practice exceptions apply; puffery not actionable. | UPA claim properly submitted; upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Clay v. Ferrellgas, Inc., 118 N.M. 266, 881 P.2d 11 (1994) (establishes cumulative conduct theory for punitive damages)
- Coates v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 127 N.M. 47, 976 P.2d 999 (1999) (applies Clay to punitive damages analysis against corporation)
- Atler v. Murphy Enterprises, Inc., 136 N.M. 701, 104 P.3d 1092 (2005) (acknowledges Clay framework in punitive damages review)
- Chavarria v. Fleetwood Retail Corp., 140 N.M. 478, 143 P.3d 717 (2006) (recognizes applicability of cumulative conduct and managerial theories)
- Feil v. Charter Hosp. of Albuquerque, Inc., 118 N.M. 390, 881 P.2d 750 (1994) (discusses direct liability for negligent credentialing (staff privileges))
- Jolley v. Energen Res. Corp., 145 N.M. 350, 198 P.3d 376 (2008) (approves proportionality considerations in punitive damages)