Champagne v. U.S., No. 930215

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
Writing for the CourtMESCHKE; VANDE WALLE
Citation513 N.W.2d 75
Decision Date08 March 1994
Docket NumberNo. 930215
PartiesDebra CHAMPAGNE and Richard Champagne, as personal representatives of the Estate of Ricky Champagne, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant and Appellee. Civ.

Page 75

513 N.W.2d 75
Debra CHAMPAGNE and Richard Champagne, as personal
representatives of the Estate of Ricky Champagne,
Plaintiffs and Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant and Appellee.
Civ. No. 930215.
Supreme Court of North Dakota.
March 8, 1994.

Page 76

Robert Vogel Law Office, P.C., Grand Forks, for plaintiffs and appellants; argued by Alice R. Senechal.

Sushma Soni (argued), Appellate Staff, Civ. Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC and Cameron W. Hayden (appearance), Asst. U.S. Atty., U.S. Attorney's Office, Fargo, for defendant and appellee.

MESCHKE, Justice.

We consider the effect of comparative fault on a medical provider's tort liability for treating a patient with suicidal ideas when the patient commits suicide. Under NDRAppP 47 the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit certified questions of law to this court:

(1) Is a suicide victim's fault to be considered under North Dakota's Comparative Fault Statutes, § 32-03.2-01 and 02; and

(2) Is any fault of the suicide victim attributable to the plaintiffs Debra Champagne and Richard Champagne who are the parents and surviving heirs of the suicide victim and institute this action as personal representatives of the estate of their deceased son.

Our answer to the first question is yes. A suicide victim's fault is considered under NDCC 32-03.2-02. But, if the medical provider, knowing the patient is suicidal and too mentally incapacitated to assume responsibility for his own well-being, undertakes a duty of care to the patient that takes in the patient's duty of self care, then the patient's fault in the act of suicide is greatly reduced. If the patient's act of suicide is a foreseeable result of the medical provider's breach of duty to treat the patient, the patient's act of suicide cannot be deemed a superseding

Page 77

cause of the patient's death that breaks the chain of causation between the medical provider and the patient, which absolves the medical provider of liability.

Our answer to the second question is that the fault of a suicide victim is attributable to plaintiffs who sue for wrongful-death damages.

For its statement of facts, the Circuit Court of Appeals used two memorandum opinions by the federal district court. We quote relevant parts:

The parents of Ricky Champagne, as the personal representatives of his estate, bring this medical malpractice/wrongful death action against the United States of America pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq., and 1346(b). The plaintiffs allege that employees of the Indian Health Services (IHS) in Belcourt, North Dakota, were negligent in their care of Ricky Champagne following his suicide attempt on January 25, 1989, and that this negligence was a proximate cause of his later suicide on February 20, 1989.

* * * * * *

On February 20, 1989, Ricky Champagne, an eighteen year-old Native American male, died as a result of a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the chest.

* * * * * *

The months prior to Ricky's death reflect the life of a troubled young man. Ricky turned eighteen two months prior to his death.

* * * * * *

On January 25, 1989, at approximately 1:00 p.m., Ricky attempted suicide with an overdose of medication, and was admitted to the IHS Hospital in Belcourt, North Dakota. Treatment to stabilize Ricky's medical condition was provided by Dr. James Blain. Dr. Blain referred Ricky to the IHS mental health unit for treatment of his mental condition, and wrote an order for someone to see Ricky immediately. Ricky was not seen by someone from the mental health unit until the following day.

Lance Azure, a social service representative in the mental health unit, met with Ricky on January 26 for one to two hours.... Based on the limited history that was obtained, it is surmised by the experts who testified in the case that Ricky was suffering from an adolescent adjustment disorder with suicidal ideations. However, some of the experts could not rule out major depression.... [T]he conflict between Ricky and his father weighed heavily on Ricky's mind.

On January 27, Dr. Blain wrote an order that Ricky could be discharged upon Mental Health's approval. Ricky was discharged on Azure's approval the next day on the condition that he return to see Azure later that afternoon. Ricky and his mother returned to the hospital that afternoon, but did not locate Azure.

IHS did not schedule or provide any further counseling for Ricky after his discharge. IHS did not refer Ricky for evaluation by, or consult with, a psychologist or psychiatrist.

Ricky returned home to live with his parents, but the tension between Ricky and his father remained unresolved. As is often the case, the subject of the suicide attempt was avoided. No counseling was provided the family in order to deal with the suicide attempt of a family member, or to resolve the conflicts in the family that may have led to the attempt.

On February 13, Debra went to see Azure and told him that her son had quit school again, had again moved away from home, and was giving away prized possessions, one of the classic signs of planned suicide. Azure responded to Debra's concerns by intimating that Ricky was eighteen, old enough to take care of himself and do what he wanted, and that Debra should not be concerned. However, Azure did attempt to contact Ricky, was unable to, and left a note at Ricky's grandmother's house. He made no further attempts to contact Ricky.

* * * * * *

Ricky called Azure on February 16, 1989, and Azure asked Ricky if he would like to make an appointment for counseling. Ricky made an appointment for the next

Page 78

day, but did not keep it. After the missed appointment, Azure took no subsequent action to contact Ricky or to determine whether Ricky was suicidal. At this point in time, Ricky had essentially received no counseling or other form of treatment since his discharge from the hospital. Ricky shot himself three days later.

* * * * * *

IHS recognizes its duty to give care to suicide attempters in its written suicide protocol, which states, "[e]very person giving evidence of suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior should be offered appropriate counseling and/or referral services."

* * * * * *

The testimony before the court establishes that the care given to Ricky was below accepted standards of care.

* * * * * *

All the experts agreed that, with appropriate intervention, it was more likely than not that Ricky's suicide would have been prevented.

* * * * * *

[T]he court concludes that the plaintiffs have established by a preponderance of the evidence that the negligence of IHS was a proximate cause of Ricky's death.

* * * * * *

The court concludes that Ricky's problems with his father were a contributing factor in his death.

However, after having considered the percentage of fault attributable to IHS, and the percentage of fault attributable to the father/son relationship, the court finds that this fault combined still does not approach 50% of the total fault that contributed to Ricky's death. Therefore, because the statutory framework at chapter 32-03.2 of the North Dakota Century Code contemplates that all fault including intentional acts must be considered, the court finds that Ricky bears the ultimate and primary responsibility for his own death.

* * * * * *

... Ricky's suicide note provides some evidence of his state of mind near the time of his death.... At the least, the note indicates that Ricky's death was a planned and intentional act. Thus, even though IHS failed to treat Ricky, in the final analysis it was Ricky who chose to take his own life and who must bear ultimate responsibility for his own death.

* * * * * *

Because the court finds that Ricky's intentional act of suicide is the primary proximate cause of his death, and because that conduct is attributable to his parents, recovery is barred.

See Champagne v. U.S., 836 F.Supp. 684 (D.C.N.D.1992), for further details.

This case asks us to decide how a patient's act of suicide should be compared with the fault of a medical provider who, knowing about the patient's propensity to commit suicide, fails to provide reasonable medical care. A medical provider treating a patient with suicidal ideas...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 practice notes
  • Cotten v. Wilson, No. M2016-02402-SC-R11-CV
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • June 19, 2019
    ...in which the decedent was being treated by the defendant medical professional for mental health issues.21 Id. (citing Champagne v. U.S. , 513 N.W.2d 75, 81 (N.D. 1994) ("[W]hen a patient’s suicide is a foreseeable consequence of the medical provider’s negligent care, the act of suicide......
  • Hofflander v. St. Catherine's Hospital, Inc., No. 00-2467.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • July 1, 2003
    ...664 N.W.2d 590 whatever diminished capacity she may have had. See Jankee, 235 Wis. 2d 700, ¶ 84; see also Champagne v. United States, 513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D. 1994) (holding that fault comparison between health care provider and patient with diminished mental capacity should take into account th......
  • Hofflander v. St. Catherine's Hospital, Inc., Sentry Insurance, 2003 WI 77 (Wis. 7/1/2003), No. 00-2467.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • July 1, 2003
    ...taking into account whatever diminished capacity she may have had. See Jankee, 235 Wis. 2d 700, ¶84; see also Champagne v. United States, 513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D. 1994) (holding that fault comparison between health care provider and patient with diminished mental capacity should take into accoun......
  • Haugenoe v. Workforce Safety and Ins., No. 20070099.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • April 22, 2008
    ...intervening cause as a matter of law instead of submitting issue to the jury for its factual determination); Champagne v. United States, 513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D.1994) (in case in which certified question of whether a court should compare the fault of a mental health provider who had discharged a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
31 cases
  • Cotten v. Wilson, No. M2016-02402-SC-R11-CV
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • June 19, 2019
    ...in which the decedent was being treated by the defendant medical professional for mental health issues.21 Id. (citing Champagne v. U.S. , 513 N.W.2d 75, 81 (N.D. 1994) ("[W]hen a patient’s suicide is a foreseeable consequence of the medical provider’s negligent care, the act of suicide......
  • Hofflander v. St. Catherine's Hospital, Inc., No. 00-2467.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • July 1, 2003
    ...664 N.W.2d 590 whatever diminished capacity she may have had. See Jankee, 235 Wis. 2d 700, ¶ 84; see also Champagne v. United States, 513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D. 1994) (holding that fault comparison between health care provider and patient with diminished mental capacity should take into account th......
  • Hofflander v. St. Catherine's Hospital, Inc., Sentry Insurance, 2003 WI 77 (Wis. 7/1/2003), No. 00-2467.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • July 1, 2003
    ...taking into account whatever diminished capacity she may have had. See Jankee, 235 Wis. 2d 700, ¶84; see also Champagne v. United States, 513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D. 1994) (holding that fault comparison between health care provider and patient with diminished mental capacity should take into accoun......
  • Haugenoe v. Workforce Safety and Ins., No. 20070099.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • April 22, 2008
    ...intervening cause as a matter of law instead of submitting issue to the jury for its factual determination); Champagne v. United States, 513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D.1994) (in case in which certified question of whether a court should compare the fault of a mental health provider who had discharged a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT