289 Ga. 739
Ga.2011Background
- Bruscato killed his mother in August 2002 while under treatment by Dr. O'Brien for severe mental illness.
- Bruscato’s guardian filed a medical malpractice suit against O'Brien alleging treatment failures contributed to the murder.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of O'Brien based on public policy against profiting from one’s own wrongs.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Bruscato’s claim could proceed despite potential wrongdoing.
- Georgia Supreme Court affirmed, adopting the Court of Appeals’ public policy analysis and denying summary judgment.
- Key issue is whether Bruscato’s mental illness and lack of criminal/culpable adjudication at the time of the act bars his claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether public policy bars Bruscato’s claim. | Bruscato may seek damages for medical malpractice not to profit from murder. | Public policy prevents profits from one’s own wrongful act. | Not barred at this stage; factual questions remain. |
| Whether Bruscato can profit from his own alleged wrongdoing given unresolved mental capacity. | Mental illness could prevent culpable conduct, preventing profit defense. | Conceivable profit from act if knowingly wrongful. | Issue for jury; factual dispute remains about mental capacity at time of act. |
| Whether Bruscato’s claim is wholly related to the murder or also to improper medical treatment. | Claim targets negligent treatment by O'Brien, not solely the murder. | •Treatment claim intertwined with wrongful act; public policy should bar. | Not barred; claim includes medical treatment injuries independent of murder. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brandvain v. Ridgeview Institute, 188 Ga.App. 106 (Ga. App. 1988) ([A] patient may be so mentally ill that, as a matter of law, he is not held to exercise any degree of care for himself.)
- Swofford v. Cooper, 184 Ga.App. 50 (Ga. App. 1987) (psychotic at time of crime; could not have been held to exercise any degree of diligence)
- Levenson v. Word, 286 Ga. 114 (Ga. 2009) (slayer statute requires conviction or clear and convincing evidence of felonious killing to bar inheritance)
- Cole v. Taylor, 301 N.W.2d 766 (Iowa 1981) (no public policy defense where defendant already convicted)
- Lingle v. Berrien County, 206 Mich.App. 528 (Mich. App. 1994) (cites public policy considerations related to wrongdoing-related claims)