Reyes-Morales v. Hosp. Gen. Menonita, Inc. (Summary)

EMTALA

Reyes-Morales v. Hosp. Gen. Menonita, Inc., Civil No. 12-1018(JAF) (D. P.R. Mar. 15, 2013)

The United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico partially granted a patient’s motion for reconsideration of his Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (“EMTALA”) claims against a hospital after the trial court had granted the hospital’s motion to dismiss.  In the case, the patient presented at one hospital, and he was subsequently transferred twice.  He alleged that both transfers violated EMTALA because he was not stabilized prior to being transferred.  In its motion to dismiss, the first hospital argued that it was not subject to EMTALA because it was not a participating hospital and did not have a dedicated emergency department.  However, the first hospital did not argue that these same defenses extended to the second and third hospitals that the patient visited during the course of his treatment. 

Because the first hospital’s defense of lack of jurisdiction did not extend to the second and third hospitals, and taking the circuit court of appeal’s flexible approach to determining jurisdiction that permits such determinations to be made at the time of trial rather than merely on the pleadings, the court granted the patient’s motion for reconsideration and deferred its ruling on the jurisdictional question until after discovery.  Furthermore, the court noted that it had raised additional questions sua sponte in its opinion that granted the hospital’s motion to dismiss and, as such, decided to permit the patient to respond to these additional questions regarding whether the hospitals had satisfied EMTALA’s stabilization requirement.  Accordingly, the court partially granted the patient’s motion for reconsideration, and it ordered the parties to conduct discovery.