Andersen v. Khanna
Decision Date | 15 June 2018 |
Docket Number | No. 14-1682,14-1682 |
Parties | Alan ANDERSEN, Individually and as Injured Parent of Chelsea Andersen and Brody Andersen, and Diane Andersen, Wife of Alan Andersen, Appellants, v. Sohit KHANNA, Iowa Heart Center, P.C., and Catholic Health Initiatives Iowa Corp. d/b/a Mercy Hospital Medical Center, Appellees. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Marc S. Harding of Harding Law Office, Des Moines, for appellants.
Nancy J. Penner, Jennifer E. Rinden, and Robert D. Houghton of Shuttleworth & Ingersoll, P.L.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellees.
A patient and his family brought a medical negligence action against a physician and the physician’s employer. They alleged specific negligence and the failure of the physician to obtain informed consent. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the claim of informed consent based on the physician’s failure to disclose his lack of training and experience in performing the particular procedure. During trial, the court refused to allow the plaintiffs to proceed with their informed-consent claim based on the physician’s failure to disclose the risk of the surgery considering the patient’s bad heart.
The case proceeded to trial on the specific negligence claim. However, the court would not submit a specification of negligence regarding the physician’s lack of training or experience. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants, and the court entered judgment for the defendants. The patient and his family appealed. We transferred the case to the court of appeals, and it affirmed the judgment of the district court. The patient and his family sought further review, which we granted.
On further review, we affirm the district court’s judgment on the specific negligence claim. However, we find the district court erred when it removed the two informed-consent claims from the case. Accordingly, we remand the case back to the district court to allow the patient and his family to proceed on their two informed-consent claims consistent with this opinion.
On January 2, 2004, Alan Andersen underwent a Bentall heart procedure performed by Dr. Sohit Khanna, an employee of the Iowa Heart Center, P.C. Khanna performed the procedure at the Mercy Hospital Medical Center in Des Moines. At the time, Khanna did not have any experience or training in performing the particular Bentall procedure used on Andersen. There were several complications with the procedure that resulted in Andersen being in a coma, undergoing a second heart surgery, and having a heart transplant.
In September 2005, Andersen, his wife, and children1 filed a petition against Khanna, Iowa Heart, and Mercy. In addition to alleging negligence against Khanna, Iowa Heart, and Mercy, Andersen alleged Khanna and Mercy failed to obtain informed consent from Andersen prior to surgery. The basis of the informed-consent allegation was that Khanna, Iowa Heart, and Mercy failed to properly advise Andersen of the risks and dangers of the procedure.
Andersen filed an amended petition in August 2008. In the amended petition, he alleged Khanna and Iowa Heart did not obtain informed consent because they failed to advise Andersen that Khanna had limited experience in performing a Bentall procedure.
In May 2010, Khanna and Iowa Heart filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the informed-consent allegations in the amended petition, claiming a physician does not have a duty to disclose physician-specific characteristics or experience in obtaining a patient’s informed consent. Notably, the motion for partial summary judgment did not explicitly challenge Andersen’s informed-consent claim to the extent it was based on Khanna’s and Iowa Heart’s alleged failure to disclose the risks and dangers of the procedure.
This ruling removed from the case the informed-consent claim based on failure to disclose lack of experience. This ruling did not remove the informed-consent claim based on failure to advise Andersen of the risks and dangers of the procedure due to his bad heart.
In May 2011, Dr. Henri Cuenoud, one of the defendants' experts, was deposed. In that deposition, Dr. Cuenoud opined Andersen’s heart valve "was severely stenotic and leaking a lot as well[, which] is the worst valve condition you can get" and described Andersen’s heart’s presurgery condition as exhausted, "like somebody at the end of a marathon." Dr. Cuenoud also concluded Khanna was aware of the poor condition of Andersen’s heart. When asked, "[G]iven Mr. Andersen’s dire condition prior to surgery, were there any special or out-of-the-ordinary steps that Dr. Khanna should have taken to deal with it," Dr. Cuenoud replied, "I would say that I would have quoted a higher risk of surgery of not being able to come off the pump ... something like 25 percent chance of not making it" and that, retrospectively, Khanna should have been more forthcoming about the risk of surgery.
Based on that information from Dr. Cuenoud’s deposition, on June 1, 2011, Andersen filed a motion to reconsider the June 15, 2010 partial summary judgment ruling on informed consent. Andersen asserted Khanna should have informed him of the increased risk of surgery due to Andersen’s heart’s poor presurgical condition. Andersen requested the court reverse its partial summary judgment grant and "allow[ ] the parties to adduce evidence regarding the informed consent issue as it has now developed in light of the anticipated testimony of Dr. Henri Cuenoud."
On September 9, 2011, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Mercy from the lawsuit. Therefore, any reference to Khanna will hereinafter also refer to Iowa Heart.
This ruling allowed Andersen to pursue an informed-consent claim based on Khanna’s failure to disclose the increased risk from the heart’s presurgery condition.
Trial began in October 2011 but resulted in a mistrial on October 31, 2011. The court reset the case for trial to begin in April 2013. In anticipation of the second trial, Andersen submitted proposed jury instructions, including an informed-consent instruction based on Khanna’s failure to disclose a material risk due to the presurgery condition of Andersen’s heart. The second trial also resulted in a mistrial on April 15, 2013. Following the second mistrial, both Andersen and Khanna retained new counsel.
The court reset the case for a third trial to begin in July 2014. On June 30, 2014, Andersen submitted proposed jury instructions, which again included informed consent based on Khanna’s failure to disclose a material risk due to the presurgery condition of Andersen’s heart.
Andersen’s counsel answered, "Not to my knowledge," and the district court...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wood v. Rutherford
...not have been aware of it in the exercise of ordinary care."25 (Footnote added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Andersen v. Khanna , 913 N.W.2d 526, 537 n.4 (Iowa 2018) ; see also Holt v. Nelson , 11 Wash. App. 230, 240–41, 523 P.2d 211 (1974) (enumerating various exceptions). The emerge......
-
State v. Hauge
...U.S. at 413–15, 117 S.Ct. 882.25 Mimms , 434 U.S. at 111, 98 S.Ct. 330.26 Becker , 458 N.W.2d at 607–08.27 See, e.g. , Andersen v. Khanna , 913 N.W.2d 526, 537 (Iowa 2018).28 Id.29 Christo Lassiter, Consent to Search by Ignorant People , 39 Tex. Tech. L. Rev. 1171, 1192 (2007) [hereinafter ......
-
Willet v. Johnson & Johnson
...material to making a truly informed and intelligent decision concerning the proposed medical procedure. See Andersen v. Khanna , 913 N.W.2d 526, 536 (Iowa 2018) (citing Pauscher v. Iowa Methodist Medical Center , 408 N.W.2d 355, 359, 360–61 (Iowa 1987) ). Even if this opinion might be admis......
-
Bindner v. Traub
...the undisclosed provider-specific circumstance impacts the risk of receiving the consented-to treatment from the provider. See Andersen, 913 N.W.2d at 541-42; Goldberg, 912 A.2d at 703; Howard, 800 at 85; Johnson, 545 N.W.2d at 499-500, 505, 510; Hidding, 578 So.2d at 1198. But see DeGennar......