Johnson v. Omondi
294 Ga. 74
Ga.2013Background
- Johnsons sued Dr. Omondi for medical malpractice arising from Shaquille’s ED visit for chest pain; Shaquille later died of bilateral pulmonary embolism two weeks after discharge.
- Dr. Omondi treated Shaquille, ruled out pulmonary embolism, and diagnosed pleurisy, issuing Toradol with discharge instructions.
- OCGA § 51-1-29.5 (c) imposes a clear-and-convincing gross-negligence burden in emergency-medicine cases.
- Trial court granted summary judgment to Omondi; Court of Appeals plurality affirmed.
- Georgia Supreme Court reversed, holding the statute’s gross-negligence standard applies and may defeat summary judgment when evidence shows gross deviation from accepted medical standards.
- Court adopted a definition focusing on a gross deviation from generally accepted medical standards in similar circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OCGA § 51-1-29.5 (c) requires clear and convincing proof of gross negligence. | Johnsons contend gross negligence must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. | Omondi argues summary judgment is proper given no clear-and-convincing gross-negligence showing. | Yes, but in appropriate cases the record may raise genuine issues for trial. |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate under OCGA § 51-1-29.5 (c). | Record could show gross deviation from standard care by Shaquille’s care. | Record lacks clear-and-convincing evidence of gross negligence. | No; trial court erred in granting summary judgment. |
| How gross negligence should be defined in medical malpractice under § 51-1-29.5 (c). | Gross negligence is a gross deviation from the standard of care used by medical professionals. | Traditional vague definitions suffice; no special medical standard required. | Court adopts a medical-standard-centric articulation: gross negligence is a substantial, gross deviation from generally accepted medical care. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gliemmo v. Cousineau, 287 Ga. 7 (Ga. 2010) (definitional framework for gross negligence in medical context)
- Pottinger v. Smith, 293 Ga. App. 626 (Ga. App. 2008) (summary judgment proper when no clear-and-convincing gross-negligence evidence)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment burden under clear-and-convincing standard must view evidence accordingly)
- Howard v. Pope, 282 Ga. App. 137 (Ga. App. 2006) (applies heightened burden to determine if record could support clear-and-convincing gross-negligence finding)
- In re Estate of Burton, 265 Ga. 122 (Ga. 1995) (clarifies coercive evidentiary standard between clear-and-convincing and preponderance)