Griffith v. Jones

Rule of Law:

The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act narrowly limits a trial court's authority to make preliminary determinations regarding medical review panels to specific matters under the Indiana Trial Rules, precluding it from instructing the panel on definitions, evidence, or the form and substance of its expert opinion.

Facts:

• Jon Jones was admitted to Parkview Memorial Hospital in Fort Wayne, Indiana, to undergo a femoral angiography, a procedure to be performed by Dr. Griffith.
• Jones was not advised by Dr. Griffith that there was a risk of death associated with the femoral angiography procedure.
• After the angiography was performed, Jones suffered anaphylactic shock brought on by a reaction to the radiographic contrast dye used during the procedure.
• Dr. Griffith immediately gave the patient epinephrine, but because the crash cart, which Dr. Griffith was charged with stocking, did not have diluted intravenous epinephrine, it was injected intramuscularly.
• Attempts to resuscitate Jones were unsuccessful, and he died.

Procedural Posture:

• Carol Jones, in her capacity as personal representative of Jon Jones' estate, filed a proposed complaint with the Indiana Department of Insurance, requesting the convening of a medical review panel under the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act.
• Jones filed a motion for preliminary determination of law in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, requesting that the court preliminarily determine that the medical review panel was precluded from rendering an expert opinion on the issue of informed consent.
• The U.S. District Court complied with Jones' request and issued a decision.
• Dr. Griffith appealed the U.S. District Court's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Appellant: Dr. Griffith; Appellee: Jones).
• The Seventh Circuit vacated the district court's decision, holding that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to render such a preliminary determination in the nature of an advisory opinion.
• Immediately following that decision, Jones filed another motion for preliminary determination in the Allen County Superior Court, from which the venue was changed to the Noble Superior Court.
• In this motion, Jones requested that the court order the medical review panel to find material issues of fact not requiring expert opinion on liability for informed consent, construe the term 'a factor' in Ind. Code § 16-9.5-9-7(d), and enter partial summary judgment.
• Dr. Griffith countered with a request that the court order the medical review panel chairman to exclude certain evidence from the plaintiff's panel submission.
• The Noble Superior Court (trial court) issued findings of fact and conclusions of law and judgment, holding, among other things, that Indiana adopted the 'prudent patient' standard, that the panel could not render an expert opinion on this standard, and that the phrase 'a factor' lowers the traditional threshold of causation, and denied Dr. Griffith's motion to exclude evidence.
• Dr. Griffith appealed this trial court order to the Indiana Court of Appeals (Appellant: Dr. Griffith; Appellee: Jones).
• The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court in its entirety, upholding its determination of the 'prudent patient' standard and its instructions to the medical review panel chairman, as well as its denial of Jones' motion for partial summary judgment.