Navo v. Bingham Mem’l Hosp. — Apr. 2016 (Summary)

APPARENT AGENCY

Navo v. Bingham Mem’l Hosp.
No. 42540 (Idaho Apr. 26, 2016)

The Supreme Court of Idaho vacated and remanded a grant of summary judgment by a lower court to a hospital regarding a medical malpractice action. The patient at issue broke his ankle, had an initial surgical procedure at the hospital and became infected, and, when the patient underwent a second surgery, suffered an adverse reaction to the anesthesia and died. The patient’s family sued the hospital, alleging that the hospital was liable for both its own actions and the acts of the certified registered nurse anesthetist who provided the anesthesia.  The hospital argued that it was entitled to summary judgment because the CRNA was an independent contractor, not an employee, and the hospital could not be held liable for the acts of the CRNA.

On the basis of several factors – including a hospital admission consent form that stated that anesthesia providers were independent contractors and the fact that the anesthesia consent form included language about separate bills – the court granted summary judgment to the hospital, finding the patient had failed to adequately plead apparent authority.

On appeal, the court reversed, finding that there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether the hospital’s conduct could have led the patient to believe that the CRNA was acting on the hospital’s behalf.  The court noted that the admission consent form referenced physicians being independent contractors but was silent on the issue of CRNA providers.  In addition, the anesthesia consent form was silent as to the independent contractor relationship altogether and addressed only billing issues.  Ultimately, the court held that viewing the facts in favor of the plaintiff patient, a genuine issue of material fact remained as to whether the patient had accepted the anesthesia services under the reasonable belief that the services were rendered on behalf of the hospital, such that the grant of summary judgment to the hospital was inappropriate.