Legal Briefs: Is a Medical Practice Vicariously Liable for a Doctor's Malpractice?

The Georgia Supreme Court has upheld a verdict stating that a medical practice is vicariously liable for malpractice by a physician-employee.

Clinical Scenario

The patient was a 38-year-old woman who experienced a catastrophic brain injury resulting from pulmonary edema leading to full cardiac arrest within days of giving birth to a child at Northside Hospital in Atlanta. At the hospital, the patient was treated by 2 employee-physicians of Atlanta Women’s Specialists. Her husband believed the edema that resulted in the catastrophic brain injury was caused by the physicians administering too much intravenous fluid to his wife in an attempt to reduce her high blood pressure.

The Lawsuit

The patient’s husband and the bank serving as her conservator filed suit against Atlanta Women’s Specialists and one of the 2 physicians, Dr A, but not the other physician, Dr S. The complaint, however, did contain allegations regarding Dr S’s conduct and claimed that Atlanta Women’s Specialists was vicariously responsible for the acts and omissions of both doctors.

The Decision

After a 2-week trial, a jury found in favor of the plaintiffs, and awarded $46 million. Dr A and Atlanta Women’s Specialists appealed, arguing that Dr S’s responsibility should be apportioned and subtracted from the verdict. The Appeals Court disagreed, holding that the practice was vicariously liable for the acts of its employees. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed this decision, holding that Atlanta Women’s Specialists was vicariously liable for Dr S’s actions, and that no apportionment of damages should be made against a nonparty to the case.

Ann W. Latner, JD, is a freelance writer and attorney based in New York. She was formerly the director of periodicals at the American Pharmacists Association and editor of Pharmacy Times.