Texas PJC Malpractice 2022

PJC 51.7

M EDICAL M ALPRACTICE —T HEORIES OF D IRECT L IABILITY

PJC 51.7

Abandonment of Patient by Physician

QUESTION ______ Was the abandonment, if any, by Dr. Davis of Paul Payne a proximate cause of the [ injury ] [ occurrence ]? “Abandonment” means the termination of the physician-patient relationship without reasonable notice of the physician’s intent to sever such relationship at a time when there is a necessity for continuing medical care. “Reasonable notice” means such notice as would normally give the patient reasonable time to secure other medical attention if desired. There can be no abandonment of a patient by a physician if the patient has voluntarily chosen not to return to the physician or has discharged or dismissed the physician. Answer “Yes” or “No.” Answer: _______________ COMMENT When to use. PJC 51.7 may be used if there is evidence that the plaintiff was abandoned by the defendant-physician. A physician has a duty not to abandon a patient. See Williams v. Bennett , 582 S.W.2d 577, 579 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 1979), rev’d on other grounds , 610 S.W.2d 144 (Tex. 1980); Lee v. Dewbre , 362 S.W.2d 900, 902–03 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1962, no writ); Urrutia v. Patino , 297 S.W. 512, 516 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1927, no writ); Jim M. Perdue, The Law of Texas Medical Substitution of “death.” Under the Texas wrongful death statute, a defendant’s liability may be predicated only on “an injury that causes an individual’s death.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §71.002(b); see also Kramer v. Lewisville Memorial Hospi tal , 858 S.W.2d 397, 404 (Tex. 1993). Therefore, in a case involving a claim for wrongful death, the word “death” may be substituted for the word “injury” in the neg ligence question. Modify for justified abandonment. If a legal justification for the abandonment is raised ( see Urrutia , 297 S.W. at 516), PJC 51.7 should be modified accordingly. Caveat. The Committee has omitted from the definition of abandonment the lan guage “or the failure to make reasonable provision for adequate medical attention in the event of the physician’s absence at a time when there is a necessity for continuing medical care.” The Committee believes that the failure to make adequate provision for Malpractice , 22 Hous. L. Rev. 1, 17 (2d ed. 1985). Use of “injury” or “occurrence.” See PJC 51.1.

72