Education Tools
Academic offers online learning programs, medico-legal educational workshops and continuing education opportunities to members, residents, and allied health professionals.
Find out more
Go directly to course
Resources
Appellate Decisions
previous
July 17, 2008
McDaniel v. Keck Appellate Division Third Department
Guiding Principle:
A health care provider (Good Samaritan) who voluntarily renders emergency care and treatment at the scene of an accident has qualified immunity from suit.
Summary of Facts:
Nurse "Nancy K" contracted with Bronxville Elementary School to be on site at a working farm visited by the school's students. The nurse was on site to administer medications and provide basic first aid for Bronxville students.
Expand to read more
A health care provider (Good Samaritan) who voluntarily renders emergency care and treatment at the scene of an accident has qualified immunity from suit.
Summary of Facts:
Nurse "Nancy K" contracted with Bronxville Elementary School to be on site at a working farm visited by the school's students. The nurse was on site to administer medications and provide basic first aid for Bronxville students.
Expand to read more
The seven-year-old son of a farm employee, who was not a Bronxville student, injured his eye while playing in a barn. The nurse became aware that the child had injured his eye and, although he was not a Bronxville student, she volunteered to look at his eye. According to the nurse, the child stated that he had hit himself with a string, she did not observe any redness or swelling, she administered ice, she told the parents he would probably fall asleep because he had been crying, and she further told them to see a physician if further problems developed. Other versions of the events were that the nurse was aware early on that a wire – not a string – had struck the child's eye, the eye was red and swollen, and the nurse had not mentioned seeking further medical care.
Two days after the accident, the child's mother took him to an ophthalmologist, who found the eye infected and referred the child to a specialist. Ultimately, following several surgeries, the child's right eye had to be removed.
Ruling of the Court:
The lower court granted summary judgment to the nurse and dismissed the plaintiff's complaint. The Appellate Division in Albany affirmed the lower court's decision.
Reasoning:
The Good Samaritan statute applied to the facts of this case. Some form of Good Samaritan legislation exists in all 50 states. An overriding purpose of such statutes is to encourage laypersons and professionals to help those in need, even when they are under no legal obligation to do so, by providing immunity from liability claims arising out of an attempt to assist a person in peril. In New York State, Education Law §6909(1) applies to nurses and Education Law §6527(2) applies to physicians. The New York Good Samaritan statute exempts those assisting in an emergency from suit except in instances of gross negligence. Since there was no contention of gross negligence in this case, the nurse was immune from suit.
Commentary:
It should be noted that New York is among the states that explicitly exclude care within a hospital, doctor's office or other place having proper and necessary medical equipment from the scope of statutory immunity. The New York Good Samaritan statute that governs physicians states in pertinent part:
This decision of interest is not an official citation, and should not be cited as such, nor is it intended to provide any legal advice. For the full text of the uncorrected decision , visit http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/.
previous
Two days after the accident, the child's mother took him to an ophthalmologist, who found the eye infected and referred the child to a specialist. Ultimately, following several surgeries, the child's right eye had to be removed.
Ruling of the Court:
The lower court granted summary judgment to the nurse and dismissed the plaintiff's complaint. The Appellate Division in Albany affirmed the lower court's decision.
Reasoning:
The Good Samaritan statute applied to the facts of this case. Some form of Good Samaritan legislation exists in all 50 states. An overriding purpose of such statutes is to encourage laypersons and professionals to help those in need, even when they are under no legal obligation to do so, by providing immunity from liability claims arising out of an attempt to assist a person in peril. In New York State, Education Law §6909(1) applies to nurses and Education Law §6527(2) applies to physicians. The New York Good Samaritan statute exempts those assisting in an emergency from suit except in instances of gross negligence. Since there was no contention of gross negligence in this case, the nurse was immune from suit.
Commentary:
It should be noted that New York is among the states that explicitly exclude care within a hospital, doctor's office or other place having proper and necessary medical equipment from the scope of statutory immunity. The New York Good Samaritan statute that governs physicians states in pertinent part:
[A]ny licensed physician who voluntarily and without the expectation of monetary compensation renders first aid or emergency treatment at the scene of an accident or other emergency, outside a hospital, doctor's office or any other place having proper and necessary medical equipment, to a person who is unconscious, ill or injured, shall not be liable for damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by such person or for damages for the death of such person alleged to have occurred by reason of an act or omission in the rendering of such first aid or emergency treatment unless it is established that such injuries
were or such death was caused by gross negligence on the part of such physician
This decision of interest is not an official citation, and should not be cited as such, nor is it intended to provide any legal advice. For the full text of the uncorrected decision , visit http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/.