Professional Negligence Law Reporter

Medicine

You must be a Professional Negligence Law Reporter subscriber to access this content.

If you are a member of AAJ's Professional Negligence Section or a subscriber, log in below. Not yet a Section member? Join today!

Join the Professional Negligence Section

Suit over fallen surgical camera constituted ordinary, not medical, negligence

July/August 2020

A Connecticut appellate court held that despite a plaintiff’s failure to file a certificate of good faith as required under the state’s medical malpractice laws, a hospital may be liable in negligence where a robotic camera fell on the plaintiff during surgery.

Wendy Young underwent a robotic hysterectomy at Hartford Hospital. After the procedure, she developed severe pain and bruising on the left side of her torso, which increased each day. She was treated at a hospital emergency room and subsequently learned from her treating physician that the robotic camera had fallen on her during the hysterectomy.

Young sued the hospital, alleging that it negligently created a dangerous condition by, among other things, failing to inspect the robotic equipment and train medical equipment personnel to recognize that the camera was not secure. The plaintiff did not include a certificate of good faith with her complaint.

The defendant successfully moved to dismiss for failure to provide a good faith certificate.

Reversing, the appellate court noted that under Conn. Gen. Stat. §52-190a, plaintiffs alleging personal injury claims against health care providers must attach a certificate of good faith that contains a similar health care provider’s written and signed opinion giving a detailed basis for the alleged medical negligence. Under the statute, the court said, the defendant must be a health care provider, and the plaintiff’s claim must be one for medical, not ordinary, negligence.

Here, the court found, the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts regarding the circumstances of the alleged negligence, including the camera’s position, how it was used, and whether a medical provider was manipulating the equipment when it allegedly fell on her. Thus, the court held that the complaint can reasonably be read as alleging claims for ordinary negligence, not medical malpractice. Construing the allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the court therefore remanded the case to the trial court, stating that it held no opinion as to whether some or all of the plaintiff’s allegations will later be barred for her failure to file a good faith certificate.

Citation: Young v. Hartford Hosp., 196 Conn. App. 207 (Conn. App. Ct. Mar. 3, 2020).

Plaintiff counsel: Stephen Bellis, New Haven, Conn.