Nelson v. RUSTON LONGLEAF NURSE CARE CTR.
751 So. 2d 436, 2000 WL 111467 (2000)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To recover damages for mental anguish as a bystander to another's injury, the claimant's emotional distress must be both severe and debilitating, going well beyond simple mental pain, upset, or disconcertment.
Facts:
- Elsie Mae Ziegler, who suffered from cardiomyopathy and vascular disease, became a resident at Ruston Longleaf Nurse Care Center ('Longleaf') in May 1991.
- At the time of her admission to Longleaf, Ziegler had pre-existing decubitus ulcers, including one on her right heel.
- Over the following weeks, the condition of Ziegler's heel deteriorated while under Longleaf's care.
- Ziegler's daughter, Reatha Nelson, suspected the nursing staff was not following physician's orders for wound care.
- On June 29, 1991, Nelson visited her mother, noticed a strong odor, and traced it to her mother's bandaged foot.
- At Nelson's insistence, nurses removed the bandage, revealing a severely deteriorated wound on Ziegler's heel with exposed bone and muscle tissue.
- Shortly after this discovery, Ziegler was hospitalized and her right leg was amputated due to a gangrenous infection that had developed from the wound.
Procedural Posture:
- Reatha Nelson sued Ruston Longleaf Nurse Care Center in a Louisiana trial court, alleging negligent care of her mother, Elsie Mae Ziegler.
- Following a trial, a jury found that Longleaf breached its duty of care but that this breach did not legally cause Ziegler's amputations or death.
- The jury did not award damages for Ziegler's physical injuries but did award Nelson $175,000 for her own mental anguish.
- Longleaf (defendant-appellant) appealed the jury's award for mental anguish to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a daughter's emotional distress, described as being 'very upset' and 'having a fit' with 'strong words' after witnessing the severely deteriorated condition of her mother's foot in a nursing home, rise to the level of 'severe and debilitating' mental anguish required to recover bystander damages under Louisiana law?
Opinions:
Majority - Kostelka, J.
No. A daughter's emotional distress does not rise to the level of severe and debilitating mental anguish required for bystander damages when the evidence shows only that she was 'very upset.' To recover for mental anguish under the framework established in Lejeune v. Rayne Branch Hospital, the emotional injury must be both severe and debilitating. Nelson described her own reaction as having 'a fit' and being 'very upset,' but there was no testimony indicating she was unable to function or required psychological counseling afterward. In fact, she had the presence of mind to have her son photograph the wound. Although the experience was undoubtedly 'disconcerting,' her reaction falls short of the high legal standard required for compensation, which goes well beyond simple mental pain and anguish. Therefore, the jury's award for mental anguish was clearly wrong and without a factual basis.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the stringent requirements for bystander recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress in Louisiana. It clarifies that the 'severe and debilitating' standard is a high bar that is not met by evidence of being very upset or angry, even in response to a graphic and disturbing event. The ruling emphasizes the need for plaintiffs to present specific evidence of an inability to cope or function, or proof of required psychological treatment, to sustain such a claim. This precedent makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to recover for mental anguish in medical negligence cases, especially those involving gradual deterioration rather than a sudden, traumatic accident.
