Ramirez-Ortiz v. Corporacion del Centro Cardiovascular de Puerto Rico y Del Caribe (Summary)

Vicarious Liability – Corporate Negligence

Ramirez-Ortiz v. Corporacion del Centro Cardiovascular de Puerto Rico y Del Caribe, No. 12-2024 (FAB) (D.P.R. Aug. 13, 2014)

A district court in Puerto Rico denied two requests for summary judgment, holding that there still existed a genuine issue of fact regarding whether a patient entrusted his health to a hospital system or to specific physicians.

A patient was hospitalized, and treatment was provided by two interventional cardiologists who held hospitalization privileges. After the patient’s untimely death, his survivors brought claims against the hospital for negligence, claiming that the patient entrusted his health to the hospital, not to the individual doctors.

When a patient enters a hospital and is assigned a physician, the hospital may be held vicariously liable to the patient. However, if the patient goes to the hospital by recommendation of a particular physician, the hospital is not liable for the physician’s negligence. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, stating that genuine issues of material fact still existed regarding the patient’s relationship with the doctors at the time of his treatment. The court stated that more facts will be necessary to determine whether the patient first entrusted his care to the hospital or the doctors.

For similar reasons, the court also denied the hospital’s request for summary judgment. Because it is still unclear whether the patient relied on the physicians specifically or the hospital generally, the issue of vicarious liability cannot yet be addressed. The court cannot determine whether there was a “private patient” relationship between the patient and physician while the details surrounding the patient’s admittance to the hospital are still heavily in dispute.

The court also found that the nursing staff may have violated the standard of care by failing to inform the doctor of material changes made to his pre-operative orders. Because the standard of care remains an issue of controversy, the court denied the hospital’s request for summary judgment.