It's clear that medical providers owe a duty of care to all of the patients under their care, but has that duty of care ever extended to people who weren't their patients? One recent case went to the New York Court of Appeals, proving that it is possible for that duty of care to extend to non-patients under certain circumstances.

The court examined whether a third party liability could exist when a hospital administers drugs to a patient and releases them while the patient is impaired, without warning the patient about how the drugs could affect their ability to drive safely.

A Case From New York

L. Walsh received treatment in the emergency room of South Nassau Communities Hospital. She was treated by a physician and a physician assistant. Part of her treatment included receiving the opioid painkiller Dilaudid and benzodiazepine (Ativan) through an IV.

The problem is that neither the physician nor the PA warned Walsh that it wasn't safe to drive when taking the medication. While on medication the medication, Walsh was released from the hospital and soon afterward, she started to drive herself home.

Nineteen minutes after she was discharged from the hospital, she became disoriented while driving home. She wound up crossing the double yellow lines where she drove into oncoming traffic. She struck another vehicle, injuring the other driver.

Other Driver Files a Lawsuit

The other driver that Walsh hit filed a lawsuit against the clinicians and the hospital where Walsh was treated. Initially, the case was dismissed because the clinicians didn't have a duty of care towards the other driver, only Walsh, their patient.

However, the New York Court of Appeals reversed the decision, arguing that the defendants had a duty to warn Walsh that the drugs they gave her could impair her ability to drive, that it wasn't safe for her to drive herself home.

If you've been injured by a negligent medical professional, speak with a medical malpractice lawyer to file a claim for compensation.