University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center v. Jones
485 S.W.3d 145
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- Karen Jones enrolled in U.T. M.D. Anderson Cancer Center’s blinded "Two to Quit" smoking-cessation study and was prescribed Chantix (varenicline); the study pharmacy dispensed the medication and Jones took it as directed.
- Jones had a history of depression and prior adverse reactions to Chantix; she informed the study screener of these issues before enrollment.
- After several weeks in the study, Jones attempted suicide and sustained severe, permanent injuries; she alleges the suicide attempt was caused by Chantix.
- Jones sued UTMDA for negligence, alleging negligent screening, admission to the study, and negligent prescribing/dispensing of Chantix.
- UTMDA filed a plea to the jurisdiction asserting governmental immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act (TTCA); the trial court denied the plea and UTMDA appealed interlocutorily.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the TTCA § 101.021(2) waiver applies (use of tangible personal property) | Jones: prescribing and dispensing Chantix to her is a use of tangible personal property that can waive immunity. | UTMDA: the real gravamen is negligent medical judgment/misuse of information, not use of tangible property; dispensing alone (where patient self-administers) is not a "use." | Waiver applies: prescribing and dispensing medication is a use of tangible personal property. |
| Whether the alleged use proximately caused Jones’s injuries (causation) | Jones: expert reports opine Chantix likely caused her suicide attempt, so the drug’s use proximately caused her injuries. | UTMDA: medication only furnished a condition that made the injury possible; Miller/King require more than mere involvement; medication not the proximate cause. | Held for Jones: expert evidence raises a fact issue supporting proximate causation; waiver satisfied. |
| Whether allegations of medical judgment/misuse of information are mere artful pleading | Jones: alleged negligent screening and judgment culminated in negligent prescribing/dispensing of Chantix, not just misuse of information. | UTMDA: claims are essentially malpractice/medical-judgment claims that do not invoke the tangible-property waiver. | Court: viewing pleadings and evidence as a whole, claims include negligent use of a drug, so waiver is not defeated as mere artful pleading. |
Key Cases Cited
- Texas Dep’t of Crim. Justice v. Miller, 51 S.W.3d 583 (Tex. 2001) (use of property must have actually caused injury; mere furnishing of condition insufficient)
- Dallas County Mental Health & Mental Retardation v. Bossley, 968 S.W.2d 339 (Tex. 1998) (TTCA waiver requires proximate cause by use/condition of tangible property)
- Univ. of Tex. M.D. Anderson Cancer Ctr. v. King, 329 S.W.3d 876 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (medication that only furnished unconsciousness did not proximately cause subsequent injury)
- Kamel v. Univ. of Tex. Health Science Ctr. at Houston, 333 S.W.3d 676 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (look to "true nature" of claim; errors in medical judgment alone do not invoke tangible-property waiver)
- Quinn v. Memorial Medical Ctr., 764 S.W.2d 915 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1989) (dispensing or administering drugs can constitute a use of tangible personal property)