Doctor Faces Med Mal Lawsuit Over Patient’s Suicide

A medical malpractice lawsuit in the Florida Supreme Court could have a profound impact on how doctors treat depression and patients that are potentially suicidal in the future.

The lawsuit was filed by a plaintiff that alleges his wife’s suicide in 2008 was a direct result of malpractice. The case has slowly made its way to the Supreme Court after the original case was decided in favor of the defendant and an appeals court overturned that ruling and moved the case to the higher court last year.

Plaintiff filed original complaint after wife’s suicide

Robert Granicz filed his original lawsuit on behalf of his wife Jaqueline, who hanged herself in 2008. The day prior to her suicide, Granicz states Jacqueline called her physician’s office, stating she had stopped taking Effexor, a medication her doctor had prescribed to her for the treatment of depression in 2005. She also told the office she had been suffering gastrointestinal issues, severe mental strain and had experienced many recent bouts of crying. The assistant that took Granicz’s call relayed the information to the physician, who changed Granicz’s depression medication and set up an appointment for her with a gastroenterologist.

The physician, Joseph Chirillo, left samples of the new medication, Lexapro, at the front desk of his office for Granicz to pick up. However, Dr. Chirillo did not speak to Granicz personally or ask her to make an appointment with him. The next day, her husband Robert claims Granicz overdosed on her new medication and hanged herself.

Failure to recognize suicidal symptoms alleged

In his complaint, Robert Granicz alleges medical negligence on the part of Dr. Chirillo led to his wife’s death. Granicz claims that the physician should have recognized the suicidal symptoms in his wife and taken additional steps to prevent the event. Specifically, Granicz states in his complaint that Dr. Chirillo should have seen his wife personally and he should have performed a complete evaluation before changing her antidepressant medication.

Dr. Chirillo and his attorney countered the allegations in the lawsuit, stating that the physician could not be held liable for his patient’s death. The defense pointed out that case law deals with cases involving suicide differently because suicide is a “unique, deliberate and intentional act that cannot be predicted.”

In the initial lawsuit, the plaintiff accused the physician of breaching a standard duty of care as set by other physicians. The circuit judge in that court ruled in favor of the defendant, who argued that there was no possible way to predict a suicide. The plaintiff appealed the decision and the Second District Court of Appeal, which determined that the plaintiff’s expert testimony regarding Dr. Chirillo’s breach of duty should be resolved by an expert witness.

Appeal court questions foreseeable risk vs. foreseeable injury

In the decision by the Second District Court of Appeal, the court stated, “The proper inquiry that the court should have made to determine the legal issue of duty ‘is whether the defendant’s conduct created a foreseeable zone of risk, not whether the defendant could foresee the specific injury that actually occurred.’”

The decision by the Second Court allows this case to move forward to the Florida Supreme Court at the request of the defendants. The case could have significant ramifications on how medical malpractice lawsuits involving suicides are handled by courts in the future.

Resources Resources