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

Granting motion to set aside verdict on proximate cause was erroneous

July/August 2024

A New York appellate court held that a trial court had erred in granting a defendant physician’s motion to set aside a verdict on the issue of proximate cause and for judgment as a matter of law in a case alleging failure to send a suicidal patient to a hospital ER.

Richard Shouldis, who suffered from lower back pain, sought treatment from physician Theodore Strange. Over the next five weeks, Shouldis complained of anxiety brought on by his new supervisor. During one of the appointments, Shouldis’s wife accompanied him and expressed concern that Shouldis would kill himself. Strange allegedly asked Shouldis if he was going to hurt himself and then recommended he see a psychologist. That night, Shouldis died by suicide at his home.

His wife, individually and on behalf of the estate, sued Strange, alleging he committed medical negligence by failing to send Shouldis to an ER. A jury awarded damages to the plaintiffs. The defense then moved successfully to set aside the verdict on the issue of proximate cause and for judgment as a matter of law.

Reversing, the appellate court found that a motion for judgment as a matter of law may be granted only when the trial court determines there is no valid line of reasonable and permissible inferences that could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the jury. Here, however, the plaintiffs’ expert witness testified that Shouldis’s suicide was preventable and that an ER referral would have allowed him to be hospitalized. This was sufficient to allow a reasonable person to conclude that it was more probable than not that Strange’s conduct, under these circumstances, diminished Shouldis’s chance of a better outcome, the court said.

Consequently, the court remitted the case to the trial court for a determination of the remaining branches of the defendant’s motion, including a request to set aside the verdict on the issue of standard of care.

Citation: Shouldis v. Strange, 2024 WL 1895968 (N.Y. App. Div. May 1, 2024).

Plaintiff counsel: Vito Cannavo and AAJ member Brian Shoot, both of New York City.