Anestis v. United States (Summary)

DUTY TO TREAT

Anestis v. United States, Civil Action No. 11-28-DLB-REW (E.D. Ky. Dec. 3, 2014)

fulltextA federal district court in Kentucky ruled that Kentucky law imposed a duty on a health care clinic to treat an individual with a medical emergency, even though the clinic did not have emergency facilities. The court reasoned that the clinic was one of four divisions within the Lexington Veteran’s Administration (“VA”) network, all of which shared a common name, geography and bureaucratic element of control. The court indicated that its ruling was limited to VA facilities, since they serve a narrow patient base.

In the case, a veteran arrived at the clinic complaining of trauma and emotional distress. Though he was in need of emergency care, the veteran was turned away because he was not enrolled in the VA system. Upon returning home, the veteran assaulted his wife and committed suicide. The veteran’s estate sued the VA for its failure to provide treatment. Partial summary judgment for duty and breach was granted to the veteran’s estate.

The court denied the government’s motion to reconsider, affirming the standard that, while hospitals usually have no duty to admit a patient without an order from a physician, there is a duty to treat in a medical emergency. Though the state does not have any official definition of what constitutes a medical emergency, for purposes of providing emergency care, the court used the definition provided in the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. The court held the VA to this standard, finding that it should have provided emergency care, even though the clinic did not have emergency facilities. The court found that the clinic was part of the Lexington VA system, and noted that “[w]hen a healthcare provider serves a particularly small cross-section of the community, as the Lexington VA does, it is reasonable to impose upon it a duty to provide emergency care, whether or not an individual seeks treatment at the correct location.”