Toth v. Chambersburg Hospital, No. 208 MDA 2024 (Pa. Super, October 15, 2024)(Stevens, J.)
Although Plaintiff never briefed the issue the Court did consider whether there was sufficient proof in discovery of willful misconduct of gross negligence from elderly person who wound up dying. The Plaintiff only found the Merek brief in advance of oral argument. The record was inadequate. The issue decided by the lower court was whether the Mental Health Procedures Act shields the hospital from liability of injuries sustained by Ms. Toth while she was in Appellees care. In granting summary judgment the trial court determined that the hospital is immune from suit in this circumstance. The lower court determined and the Superior court agreed that whether Ms. Toth’s activity of walking when she fell was part of the care plan for her dementia, or part of some ancillary physical maintenance that she needed as a patient. Nevertheless, it was covered as “treatment” under Section 104 of the Mental Health Procedures Act. Gross negligence must be something which is consistent with the MHPA. Only when the issue is free and clear from doubt can it be removed from the jury. There was no indication for the expert report that the conduct from the hospital was gross or a flagrant deviation from the ordinary standard of care. No jury could find that the hospital was grossly negligent. Therefore, summary judgment for the hospital was affirmed.
