Friday, September 14, 2012

Medical Malpractice Debts


            Sorry about not posting in a while – the start of the fall semester and the submission of job applications has taken considerable time.

            I would like to discuss a topic that is, admittedly, not as common an issue for most debtors as those I have previously discussed, but still interesting in my view.  Broadly speaking, this is the ability to discharge a debt under section 523(a)(6), which is for “willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity.”  Narrowly speaking, I will be discussing this in the context of medical malpractice debts. 

            Speaking very generally, a debtor can discharge the equivalent of a negligent tort, but not something that would amount to an intentional tort.  A tort is, broadly speaking, a wrongdoing for which the law provides a remedy in a civil case.  To illustrate in a simple example, if I am driving my car, drop my cell phone on the floor, and I accidentally run over a person who later sues me, I can probably discharge this debt in bankruptcy.  I use this example rather than drunk driving, as that presents somewhat different rules under 523(a)(9) – I’ll write more on that in a later post.  If I am driving my car, see a person whom I dislike, put the pedal to the metal and purposely hit that person who later sues me, bankruptcy will not relieve me of this duty (as it shouldn’t).

            A special situation, then, arises for physicians and other medical professionals.  The leading case on this subject was issued by the Supreme Court in Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57 (1998).  In a unanimous opinion issued by Justice Ginsburg, the Court held that a debt arising from a medical malpractice judgment for negligent or reckless conduct was dischargeable in bankruptcy.  Despite its unanimity among the Court members, I recall feeling great skepticism the first time I read the case, and still find its reasoning somewhat questionable.  I have chosen to write about this case, in part, because when I was a staffer on an academic journal last year, I realized that I wanted to write about this subject at a point when it was too late to make such a decision.  But I digress. 

            In Geiger, the patient had a foot injury.  She sought treatment from Dr. Geiger, who prescribed her oral penicillin in order to reduce the risk of infection, despite his knowledge that intravenous penicillin would have been more effective.  Dr. Geiger then left for a trip, and upon his return, overruled the decision of other physicians to transfer the patient to an infectious disease specialist, as he believed the infection was less severe.  Dr. Geiger was wrong, and the patient eventually had to have her right leg amputated below the knee. 

            The patient then sued Dr. Geiger, and obtained a judgment for about $355,000.  Dr. Geiger, having had his wages garnished as a result of his lack of malpractice insurance, then filed for bankruptcy.  The Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri did not allow this debt to be discharged, holding that it Dr. Geiger’s actions were below prevailing medical standards, and so amounted to “willful and malicious” injury in 523(a)(6).  The District Court agreed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed, holding that the exemption from discharge is confined to actions amounting to an intentional tort, and allowed the discharge.

            The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, and affirmed the Eighth Circuit’s decision to allow the discharge.  The Court interpreted 523(a)(6) to mean that the exception from discharge is limited to acts done with the intent to cause injury.  Applying the statute to mean that all acts done intentionally which cause injury was too broad of a standard for the Court.  It went on to say that intentional torts “generally require that the actor intend ‘the consequences of an act,’ not simply ‘the act itself.’”

            I don’t take issue with the reasoning in general.  The result in the case of medical malpractice debts in particular seems inequitable to me, though.  Why not hold professionals, such as physicians, to a higher standard?  Dr. Geiger, without malpractice insurance (which he probably should have had), decided to practice medicine in a manner that he knew was less effective.  The patient alleged that this was simply a cost-cutting measure.  The result for the patient was that she had a good portion of her leg amputated, and yet did not receive any compensation from her physician who was, by all accounts, negligent.  To me, a physician such as Dr. Geiger should have known better than to practice medicine in this manner, whether it was for cost-cutting or not.  Generally in tort law, physicians and other professionals are held to a higher standard of care than the average person.  To me, it only makes sense for this special standard of care to translate to a special exception for discharge in bankruptcy as well.  Otherwise, the higher standard of care may be reduced to a lack of meaning should the physician file for bankruptcy.

            The Court’s decision was well-reasoned.  The Bankruptcy Code, then as today, does not provide an exception of discharge for medical malpractice debts.  Near the end of the Court’s opinion, Justice Ginsburg writes that although the Court declines to make a policy exception for discharge for medical malpractice debts, “Congress, of course, may so decide.  But unless and until Congress makes such a decision, we must follow the current direction § 523(a)(6).”  It’s in Congress’s hands to fix what I perceive as an inequitable loophole.  I’m not getting my hopes up.

            I expect to write again next week on a topic which applies to (nearly) all individual debtors: state exemptions from the bankruptcy estate.  I’ll focus on my state of Virginia, as it has some interesting provisions.  Thanks for reading.

-JP

28 comments:

  1. This is a great post! I came across your blog while I was looking for lawyers in Philadelphia, I'm happy I did because this was such a interesting and helpful article about malpractice debts. Thank you for sharing this with us and for helping!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is always preferable to have a doctor who is capable of listening when you really need to talk to a doctor about a difficult set of symptoms.http://www.md247.com/md247-blog/category/2-telemedicine-.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you for sharing. That is a terrifying story. Not amount of money can replace a limb. If you live in MA contact medical malpractice attorney Salem MA today!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you for sharing nice story. It has a lesson implied. They must for their malpractices. Good that we have malpractice attorneys for this case.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wow. I never knew how much filing went into scenarios such as this. For me, I'm always appreciative of having a medical malpractice attorney near Hammond near my hometown. Thanks for the post!

    ReplyDelete
  6. thanks for the great insight. I love the illustration you gave on the post. Thanks for the share.
    Maryland birth injury attorney

    ReplyDelete
  7. I see the greatest contents on your blog and I absolutely love reading them. helpful site

    ReplyDelete
  8. Great post indeed. I love the way you put it up here about the case of the doctor. Yes action should be taken and one should fight for their right. Looking forward to see more post from you.
    Cerebral palsy attorney

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks for this post. I wonder how this will affect the medical malpractice attorneys in Valparaiso IN. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thank you for sharing your post. We deserve a proper care especially about the medical care issues. Every day it can happen to anyone about the medical malpractice. To protect our rights Houston medical malpractice lawyer is experience on handling case regarding medical malpractice case. Only an expert lawyer can represent us on our behalf to win our claims.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I certainly appreciate your stuff provided in the blogs. Cincinnati bankruptcy lawyer

    ReplyDelete
  12. Medical negligence claims are legal matter that’s why it should be handle and process by a professional lawyer. Injury lawyer have the expertise and knowledge, they can really help you claim for medical negligence.

    ReplyDelete
  13. In our state, I always think a doctor linked to an Arizona medical malpractice case and found guilty of it should not be approved for bankruptcy and I'm glad it happened to be so in this particular case. Bankruptcy should not be used to help a medical professional charged with a crime.

    ReplyDelete
  14. spouse caregiver
    Spouse Caregiver, Senior Helpers and Senior Caregiving, then your search ends with CaregiverSurvivalNetwork.com.

    ReplyDelete
  15. It must be established that a medical practitioner acted negligently or unlawfully, by way of the failure to meet established and accepted standards of medical practice in the jurisdiction, and that injury or death resulted from such an act. For this reason, the most important evidence, at least initially, will be that provided in the form of a medical opinion from a practitioner providing a suitable attestation to this effect.
    Medical Negligence

    ReplyDelete
  16. Your blogs and its stuff magnetize me to return again n again. medical negligence compensation

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, great US Military force. Also, in his post you have given a chance to listen about US Military. I really appreciate your work. Thanks for sharing it. Dermatologista

    ReplyDelete
  18. congratulations guys, quality information you have given!!!
    Homepage

    ReplyDelete
  19. medical negligence helpThis is very essential blog; it helped me a lot whatever you have provided.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Medical malpractice is the most important or prefessionally act by a health care provider in which the treatment provided falls below the accepted standard of practice in the medical community and causes injury or death to the patient, with most cases involving medical error.all of these things comes under in medical malpractice.

    Hunter Law Group

    ReplyDelete
  21. Thanks for the article. So why don't all doctors have medical malpractice insurance? I assumed it was necessary to have. I didn't realize it was an optional part of owning a clinic.

    Jenn | http://www.herbertmaxey.com

    ReplyDelete
  22. To me, it only makes sense for this special standard of care to translate to a special exception for discharge in bankruptcy as well. Otherwise, the higher standard of care may be reduced to a lack of meaning should the physician file for bankruptcy.
    For more information follow the link- medical malpractice in New York

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hello,
    This post is just super and is all about New York medical malpractice lawyers. It is a better scope for the sufferers. So nice blog. Thank you much more for sharing such an article.
    new york medical malpractice lawyers

    ReplyDelete
  24. I truly get pleasure from while I read your blogs and its content.
    Medical Negligence

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thank You J.P Morgan for sharing a informative blog. It helps lot to clear the debts of Medical practice.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I am impressive on Medical Malpractice Debts blog. The post is really informative. medical malpractice lawyer NY can show a better solution!

    ReplyDelete
  27. wow this good but ,I like your post and good pics may be any peoples not like because defrent mind all poeple , family physician Phoenix

    ReplyDelete