McClellan v. Patel

ERISA PREEMPTION

McClellan v. Patel, No. 06-392-AA (D. Or. July 25, 2006)

A three-year-old boy
died after abdominal surgery, and his parents sued the performing physician
for medical negligence and the hospital for “administrative negligence” in
state court. The lawsuit was later removed to federal district court. The parents’
claims against the hospital were based on the decision to grant the physician
privileges despite a history of malpractice and the hospital’s failure to report
the physician’s malpractice incidents to the state board of medicine, as required
by statute. The district court rejected the hospital’s argument that the “administrative
negligence” claims were preempted by ERISA, because the parents were not
seeking to recover benefits due under an ERISA welfare plan or to clarify rights
to future benefits under the plan. Claims challenging the quality of a benefit
are not preempted by ERISA. The purpose of ERISA was to assure that promised
benefits would be available to participants, not to create a remedy for a participant
injured by malpractice. Because there was no indication that ERISA was intended
to displace general heath care regulation by the states, the district court remanded
the case back to state court.