Snyder v. State

• Decision Date: 04 December 2020
• Docket Number: 122234
• Citation: 138 N.Y.S.3d 802,70 Misc.3d 801
• Court: New York Court of Claims
• Parties: Marvin SNYDER, Claimant, v. STATE of New York, Defendant.

70 Misc.3d 801

138 N.Y.S.3d 802

Marvin SNYDER, Claimant, v. STATE of New York, Defendant.

122234

Court of Claims of New York.

Decided on December 4, 2020

For Claimant: S. Robert Williams, PLLC, By: S. Robert Williams, Esq. and Michael R. O'Neill, Esq.

For Defendant: Hon. Letitia James, New York State Attorney General, By: Bonnie Gail Levy, Esq., Assistant Attorney General.

Catherine E. Leahy-Scott, J. Claimant Marvin Snyder commenced this Claim on January 11, 2013 seeking damages for the failure of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) to timely treat and diagnose a heart attack

Claimant suffered on February 17, 2012 at Auburn Correctional Facility. Issue was joined on March 18, 2013. An Amended Claim was filed on September 12, 2019 and an answer to the Amended Claim was filed on October 10, 2019.

On February 17, 2012 at approximately 12:00 p.m., Claimant, then an inmate at Auburn Correctional Facility, began experiencing chest pain ( see Affirmation of Bonnie Gail Levy, Assistant Attorney General, Esq., dated August 24, 2020 [Levy Aff] Ex 12 ¹ [Claimant's First EBT], at 51-52). ² This pain intensified over the next hour and began to spread to his neck, left arm, and left shoulder ( see id. at 55). After reporting his pain to a correction officer, Claimant was brought to the infirmary where he met with Nurse Annette Boyd (Nurse Boyd) at approximately 3:00 p.m. ( see id. ; Ex 15 [Nurse Boyd EBT] at 43).

Upon arrival to the infirmary, Claimant explained to Nurse Boyd that he had been experiencing severe chest pain for the previous two hours ( see Nurse Boyd EBT at 51). In response to Claimant's complaint, Nurse Boyd took Claimant's vitals and attempted to administer an electrocardiogram

(EKG); however, Nurse Boyd could not get the EKG machine to work ( see

id. at 46-47). After Nurse Boyd determined the EKG machine was inoperable, she contacted Erie County Medical Center (ECMC) to provide telemedicine services to Claimant ( see

id. at 50).

Telemedicine, or telemed, is "providing medical consultation for patients over a link through a television or through a computer with television-type services" (Levy Aff, Ex 19 [Manka EBT], at 7). ECMC provides telemedicine services to Auburn Correctional Facility pursuant to a contract ( see Affirmation of Michelle Rudderow, Esq. [Rudderow Aff], Ex L [Contract]). Nurse Boyd explained she sought ECMC's telemedicine services because the Auburn Correctional Facility doctor was not available to see Claimant ( see Nurse Boyd EBT, at 50).

Claimant's telemedicine consultation was handled by Jennifer McCaul (f/k/a Jennifer Teleuk), a Physician Assistant (PA McCaul). PA McCaul received a patient referral form from DOCCS detailing Claimant's vital signs and medical history. Specifically, the record stated

"29-year-old male with thoracic outlet syndrome

. Complaining of chest pain time two hours. Pain also in neck and arms. Positive shortness of breath. Facility unable to obtain EKG, ‘because machine won't work.’ No known injury. States same pain as he has had in the past"

(Levy Aff

Ex 21 [PA McCaul EBT], at 17). PA McCaul diagnosed Claimant with left upper extremity pain ( see id. at 29). PA McCaul considered ordering an EKG to be performed due to Claimant's complaint of chest pain, but ultimately did not order one because Claimant's vitals were good, he was "29[,] ... ha[d] a history of thoracic outlet syndrome

[,] and ... told [her] he's had this same pain in the past which is not concerning for something acute to be occurring" ( id. at 52; see id. at 32-33, 63-65, 71-72). PA McCaul ordered that Claimant be administered Tylenol No.3 and Ultram and returned to his cell ( see id. at 36, 50-51, 65; Nurse Boyd EBT, at 49). Dr. Michael Manka (Dr. Manka), the attending physician at ECMC, agreed with PA McCaul's assessment of Claimant's condition and signed the telemed form with PA McCaul's medical orders shortly after her determination was made ( see PA McCaul EBT at 15-16; Manka EBT, at 57-58).

After the telemedicine consultation was complete, Nurse Boyd administered Claimant's medication per the telemed orders, observed Claimant for 15 minutes, and then sent him back to his cell at approximately 4:00 p.m. ( see Nurse Boyd EBT, at 77).

Claimant remained in his cell until approximately 10:00 p.m. when Correction Officer Christopher Waterman (Correction Officer Waterman) noticed Claimant "was on his bars all sweaty, pale and ... obviously sick" (Levy Aff, Ex 18 [Waterman EBT], at 16). Claimant was immediately transferred to the infirmary where he met with Nurse Richard Sharples (Nurse Sharples) at approximately 10:30 p.m. ( see id. Ex 17).

Prior to Claimant' arrival to the infirmary for the second time, Nurse Boyd informed Nurse Sharples of Claimant's earlier infirmary visit, including the purported inoperability of the EKG machine

( see id. Ex 16 [Sharples EBT], at 9). Nurse Sharples fixed the EKG machine prior to Claimant's second arrival to the infirmary by shutting the machine down, unplugging and then plugging the machine back into place, and rebooting it ( see id. ). The EKG machine had been rebooted in such manner approximately four times in the prior three to four years ( see id. at 10).

Upon Claimant's arrival to the infirmary for the second time, Nurse Sharples performed an EKG which revealed Claimant was having a heart attack

( see

id. at 22). After a second telemedicine consultation with ECMC, Claimant was transferred to SUNY Upstate Medical University Hospital (Upstate) for emergency treatment ( see Rudderow Aff Exs R, S). At Upstate, Claimant was diagnosed with "[a]cute ST elevation myocardial infarction

[,] ... [a]cute systolic heart failure [,] ... [a]cute left ventricular thrombus [, and] ... antiphospholipid antibody syndrome of hypercoagulable state," with an ejection fraction of 25-30% ( see id. Ex S). Claimant underwent an emergency cardiac catheterization and had an aortic balloon pump inserted ( see id. ). Claimant subsequently received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in April 2014 ( see Claimant's First EBT, at 97) and has received follow up care from Central New York Cardiology regarding same ( see Levy Aff Exs 39-40).

Claimant now moves for summary judgment on its first, second, third, eighth and ninth causes of action or, alternatively, an order dismissing Defendant's second and third affirmative defenses (M-95437). The first cause of action alleges that Defendant was negligent and departed from accepted standard of medical practice in treating Claimant's heart condition. As part of the first cause of action, Claimant avers that Defendant was negligent "in failing to maintain, repair or have a properly functioning EKG machine

" (Rudderow Aff, Ex C [Amended Claim] ¶ 30).

The second cause of action alleges Defendant breached its "duty of care to monitor [Claimant's] condition, to properly diagnose and/or treat said condition, [and] to ensure that ... [C]laimant received prompt and adequate medical attention" ( id. ¶ 37).

The third cause of action asserts Defendant is vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior ( see id. ¶¶ 40-45) in that Defendant should be held liable for the treatment decisions made during the telemedicine consultation ( see id. ¶¶ 15-17).

The fourth cause of action alleges a claim for negligent hiring, retention, and training of Defendant's employees with regard to diagnosing and treating Claimant ( see id. ¶¶ 47-49).

The eighth cause of action alleges a claim for medical malpractice premised upon the consequences of Defendant's delay in treating Claimant's heart attack

. In particular, the eighth cause of action states that Defendant's failure to render prompt treatment required the placement of a stent and "necessitated the immediate placement of a defibrillator implant that ... Defendant delayed providing" ( id. ¶ 70). Claimant avers that Defendant has continued to fail to provide adequate medical care to Claimant by "failing to provide ... Claimant with an ICD ( implantable cardioverter defibrillator

) scans [sic] every 90 days; allowing the battery level in ... Claimant's defibrillator to reach levels that are considered to be dangerous; allowing conditions to exist that caused ... Claimant's defibrillator battery to discharge causing additional damage to ... Claimant" ( id. ¶ 71). The ninth cause of action alleges a Claim for prima facie tort.

Defendant opposes Claimant's motion and cross-moves to dismiss Claimant's first, second, third, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth causes of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 and for summary judgment on Claimant's first, second, third, fourth, eighth and ninth causes of action (CM-95852). Defendant separately seeks a motion in limine permitting the introduction of evidence at trial of certain prison, mental health, and medical records involving Claimant's treatment after July 7, 2020 and allowing Defendant's experts to rely on same in preparing their reports and testifying at trial (M-95853). Because a portion of Defendant's cross motion to dismiss implicates this Court's jurisdiction, the Court will address it first.

Defendant moves to dismiss Claimant's sixth and seventh causes of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (2) on the ground that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over such claims. The sixth and seventh causes of action allege violations of Claimant's rights under the US Constitution. It is well settled that "claims for damages against the State based upon alleged deprivation of rights under the US Constitution are beyond the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims" ( Shelton v. New York State Liq. Auth. , 61 A.D.3d 1145, 1151, 878 N.Y.S.2d 212 [3d Dept. 2009] ; see Welch v. State of New York , 286 A.D.2d 496, 498, 729 N.Y.S.2d 527 [2d Dept. 2001] ; Zagarella v. State of New York , 149 A.D.2d 503, 504, 539 N.Y.S.2d 803 [2d Dept. 1989] ; Davis v. State of New York , 124 A.D.2d 420, 423, 507 N.Y.S.2d 520 [3d...