HARRISBURG - The estate of a deceased man that sued the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs and others over his treatment will be allowed to allege individual negligence on the part of employees of the defendants but will not be able to claim corporate negligence.
The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has affirmed a lower court decision to dismiss a claim of corporate negligence against Commonwealth health care providers but has instructed the Blair County Court of Common Pleas to require individual health care workers to stand as defendants in a wrongful death claim.
Tina M. Byrne, executor for the estate of Robert Eugene Beaverson, filed the appeal after the court granted a motion for judgment for the defendants and ultimately dismissed the case.
Brobson
Beaverson was a patient at Hollidaysburg Veterans’ Center after he was said to be experiencing mental health issues such as paranoia and confusion from Alzheimer’s dementia. He had multiple incidents with his fellow residents. In one incident, a resident allegedly pushed Beaverson, causing him to fall and hit his head. A nursing assistant allegedly was present but didn’t step in.
A little more than an hour later, she contacted a registered nurse. By then, the back of Beaverson’s head was bleeding. He was still conscious and talkative. He was taken to the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Altoona where he had a CT scan. The scan showed he suffered an acute right parafalcine subdural hematoma, so he was admitted into the ICU.
While he was later discharged and his daughter was told he would fully recover, his medical condition worsened and he passed away roughly a month after the incident.
His estate filed a wrongful death lawsuit, stating the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Military and Veteran Affairs and Hollidaysburg Veterans’ Center were medically negligent, and that sovereign immunity didn’t apply to this case as the General Assembly waived it via the medical-professional liability exception.
Still, the lower court dismissed the case. The appeals court partially agreed with the ruling, affirming in part and reversing in part. Judge Kevin Brobson wrote the ruling.
The appeals court pointed out that while sovereign immunity backs Commonwealth officials and employees who are acting within the scope of their duties, the Sovereign Immunity Act requires the General Assembly waive sovereign immunity in specific negligence lawsuits for a Commonwealth worker.
“But it does not waive sovereign immunity for individuals who act as the corporate entity,” Brobson wrote. “Thus, while Commonwealth medical facilities can be held liable for the negligence of their health care employees under a theory of respondeat superior, the waiver of immunity provided by the medical-professional liability exception does not extend to the Commonwealth-owned medical facility itself.”
Considering this, the court said it can’t rule that the lower court erred in granting the motion as it relates to corporate negligence.
It also pointed that even though the lawsuit raises corporate negligence and individual negligence via Commonwealth health care workers, it generally presents accusations related to the individual negligence, which creates an issue.
“Even though employees of the health care facilities may be responsible for carrying out the health care facilities’ responsibilities set forth in the state regulations created under the Health Care Facilities Act, the General Assembly clearly intended for those regulations to govern the actions of the health care facilities themselves and not the health care facilities’ employees,” Brobson wrote.
The appeals court ultimately affirmed the complaints related to corporate negligence but reversed it as it relates to individual negligence from Commonwealth health care workers. The court instructed the trial court to evaluate the duty/breach allegations in the complaint to decide which ones are of corporate negligence and which are of individual.