Freedman v. Fisher (Summary)

EMTALA

Freedman v. Fisher, No. 13-3145 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 2, 2015)

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania partially affirmed and partially denied a hospital’s cross-motions for summary judgment in a patient suit alleging violation of EMTALA.

A patient presented to the hospital’s emergency room complaining of chest and abdominal pain. The emergency physician examined the patient, running multiple tests. The patient was transferred within the hospital for observation and to meet with an internal medicine specialist. His condition continued to deteriorate, and he died in the hospital following a pericardial hemorrhage.

The court rejected the hospital’s argument that the plaintiff’s amended EMTALA claim was barred by the statute of limitations. Because the amended claim arose out of the same incident as the original complaint, it was held to “relate back” to the timing of the original complaint. The plaintiff alleged that the hospital violated EMTALA by failing to have an established policy or protocol for the patient’s situation. The court found that material issues of fact still existed over the hospital protocol, as it found numerous conflicts of evidence within the medical record. The court determined that this issue should be resolved by a jury. Finally, the court rejected the plaintiff’s claim that the transfer of the patient within the hospital violated EMTALA. According to the court, transferring a patient into an observation unit does not qualify as a “discharge,” meaning that it fails to meet the requirements for an EMTALA claim.