Scampone v. Highland Park Care Center, LLC
57 A.3d 582, 618 Pa. 363 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A healthcare entity, including a skilled nursing facility or its affiliated management company, can be held directly liable for its own negligence if a relationship exists wherein the entity has undertaken to render services to a resident that are necessary for the resident's protection.
Facts:
- From 1998 to 2004, Madeline Scampone was a resident at Highland Park, a skilled nursing facility, where she received care for numerous chronic health conditions.
- Ms. Scampone was susceptible to urinary tract infections (UTIs) and was hospitalized for them on several occasions in 2002 and 2003.
- Former employees testified that staffing levels at Highland Park were insufficient to provide adequate care, such as ensuring residents received enough water or tracking their food intake and health status.
- These employees stated they had informed supervisors at both Highland Park and its management company, Grane Healthcare, about the shortfalls in care caused by understaffing.
- Staff at Highland Park also allegedly failed to inform Ms. Scampone’s doctors about changes in her condition and did not follow doctors' orders for testing.
- On January 30, 2004, Ms. Scampone was admitted to the hospital and diagnosed with a UTI, dehydration, malnutrition, and bedsores.
- On February 9, 2004, Ms. Scampone died of a heart attack at the age of 94.
Procedural Posture:
- Richard Scampone, on behalf of the Estate of Madeline Scampone, filed a negligence action against Highland Park Care Center and Grane Healthcare Company in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas (the trial court).
- At the close of the plaintiff's case at trial, the court granted the defendants' motion for a compulsory nonsuit on all claims against Grane Healthcare.
- The trial court denied the nonsuit motion for the corporate negligence claim against Highland Park, which proceeded to the jury.
- The jury returned a verdict for the Scampone estate, finding Highland Park directly and vicariously liable for negligence.
- Both parties appealed to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (an intermediate appellate court).
- The Superior Court affirmed the denial of the nonsuit for Highland Park but reversed the grant of nonsuit for Grane Healthcare, remanding the case for a new trial.
- Highland Park and Grane Healthcare (appellants) were granted an appeal by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (the state's highest court).
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 the doctrine of corporate negligence, which imposes direct liability on a healthcare entity for breaching its own duties of care to a patient, apply to a skilled nursing facility and its management company?
Opinions:
Majority - Chief Justice Castille
Yes, the doctrine of corporate negligence can apply to a skilled nursing facility and its management company. The court held that direct liability for negligence is not limited to hospitals but extends to any healthcare corporation where the requisite relationship exists between the entity and the resident. The court rejected the appellants' argument that the corporate negligence theory from Thompson v. Nason Hospital was a special cause of action applicable only to hospitals. Instead, the court clarified that corporate negligence is an application of general tort principles. Immunity from liability is an exception, and nursing homes have no such judicially or legislatively created immunity. The proper legal inquiry is not whether a nursing home is 'like a hospital,' but whether the entity, through its relationship with the resident, has undertaken to provide services necessary for the resident's protection, thereby creating a direct duty of care. This duty is analyzed under Section 323 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts and traditional duty-of-care factors, focusing on the specific relationship between the parties.
Analysis:
This decision significantly broadens the scope of direct liability for healthcare providers beyond the hospital context, explicitly applying the corporate negligence doctrine to nursing homes and their management companies. It reframes the legal analysis away from a categorical comparison (e.g., 'is a nursing home like a hospital?') to a relationship-based inquiry, making it easier for plaintiffs to assert direct negligence claims against a wider variety of healthcare entities. By grounding the doctrine in general tort principles rather than treating it as a special rule for hospitals, the court established a more flexible and adaptable framework for holding corporate healthcare providers accountable for systemic failures, such as understaffing, that result in patient harm. This precedent will likely lead to an increase in direct liability lawsuits against non-hospital healthcare facilities and their corporate affiliates.
