Superior Court Addresses Scope of Immunity Provisions Under the Mental Health Procedures Act

In the case of Toth v. Chambersburg Hospital, No. 208 MDA 2024 (Pa. Super. Oct. 15, 2024 Stevens, P.J.E., Panella, P.J.E., and Lane, J.) (Op. by Stevens, P.J.E.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the entry of a summary judgment in a case involving a Plaintiff who was diagnosed with dementia and who was injured after falling while pushing an aide away and attempting to run while under the care of a hospital.

A central issue raised in this matter was whether the Defendant was entitled to immunity under the Mental Health Procedures Act.  The Plaintiff argued that the process of walking a patient in a medical facility did not fall under the types of "treatment" for which immunity is afforded under the Act.  

The Superior Court agreed with the trial court's ruling that decisions regarding the ambulatory care of mental health facility residents within a facility are governed by the Mental Health Procedures Act and subject to the statutory immunity limits under the Act.

The Court separately ruled that the facts of the case did not support the claim of gross negligence asserted by the Plaintiff.  More specifically, the Court noted that the circumstances of the Plaintiff’s injury, which involved a Plaintiff falling after pushing an aide away and attempting to run, could not possibly rise to the level of an allegation of gross negligence on the part of the Defendants. The Pennsylvania Superior Court noted that legislature intended that “gross negligence” refer to a form of flagrant negligence where the facts support findings of liability substantially more than ordinary carelessness.

Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.


I send thanks to Attorney James M. Beck of the Philadelphia office of Reed Smith law firm for bringing this case to my attention.