In the case of McClure
v. Parvis, No. 17-3049 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 6, 2018 Savage, J.), the court
denied a Motion to Dismiss filed by a Defendant in a medical malpractice claim
raising issues of corporate negligence.
The court noted that a claim for corporate negligence arises
from the policies, acts, or omissions of the entity itself, and not from
specific acts of the individual employees of the entity.
Notably, while this court indicated that corporate negligence
theories are not limited to hospitals, it otherwise noted that the courts of Pennsylvania have not
extended such theories to apply to physician offices as such offices are not
comprehensive health centers that are responsible for the total health of its
patients.
The court also noted that, to decide whether a particular
health care entities owes the Plaintiff a non-delegable duty requires an
examination of the extent of that entity’s oversight and control of the medical
professionals directly providing the care to the Plaintiff. As this determination is fact-based, the court ruled that this analysis could not be completed at the Motion to Dismiss stage.
Accordingly, the court denied the Motion to Dismiss filed in
this matter and allowed the case to proceed into discovery.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click
this LINK. The Court's companion Order can be viewed HERE.
I send thanks to Attorney James M. Beck of the Philadelphia
office of the law firm of Reed Smith for bringing this case to my attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.