Ollison v. Alameda Health Systems

Background

James Ollison, who represented himself and was proceeding without paying filing fees, sued Alameda Health Systems, doing business as Highland Hospital, and Paramedics Plus. The lawsuit concerned the treatment of his son, Akin Lamar Ollison, who died on February 28, 2019.

According to the complaint, Akin went to Highland Hospital on February 18, 2019, with acute respiratory distress. The hospital admitted him overnight and diagnosed an acute asthma attack and an upper respiratory infection. Ollison alleged that Highland discharged Akin the next day while he was still experiencing respiratory distress and did not provide certain medications, including inhalers and Prednisone. Ollison also alleged that, during a later respiratory emergency, Paramedics Plus personnel did not initially assess Akin’s vital signs, take his medical history, provide oxygen, or administer an inhaler. Akin later went into cardiac arrest and died after suffering several serious medical conditions.

Ollison asserted two claims under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), along with claims for declaratory relief, medical malpractice, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium. Alameda Health moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that the EMTALA claims were not plausibly pleaded and that the state claims were untimely.

EMTALA claims

The court granted the motion to dismiss the EMTALA claims on the merits. EMTALA requires a hospital emergency department to screen patients for emergency medical conditions and, when such a condition is found, to stabilize the patient or properly transfer the patient. The court explained that EMTALA’s stabilization requirement ends when the patient is admitted for inpatient care; after admission, alleged negligent treatment is generally addressed through state medical-malpractice law rather than EMTALA.

For Akin’s first visit, the court held that Ollison did not plausibly allege that Akin was unstable when discharged. The court also held that Ollison alleged Akin was admitted as an inpatient, which independently ended EMTALA liability. For the second visit, the court likewise held that Akin was admitted and treated, foreclosing an EMTALA claim. The court did not reach Alameda Health’s argument that the Government Claims Act’s six-month presentment requirement also barred the EMTALA claim.

State-law claims

The court addressed the state claims on procedural grounds. It explained that, without a federal claim, it generally would not exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state claims. It also held that the claims were untimely under two California deadlines: the six-month deadline for filing an action after rejection of a Government Claims Act claim and the one-year medical-malpractice statute of limitations under the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act.

Ollison submitted a written claim to Highland Hospital on June 8, 2019. Highland rejected it in a letter dated August 23, 2020, and told him that he had six months to file a state-court action. Ollison filed this federal lawsuit on July 21, 2020. The court held that the lawsuit was filed more than six months after the rejection letter and therefore was untimely under the Government Claims Act. The court also held that, even if the lawsuit had been filed within that six-month period, it was filed more than one year after Akin’s death and therefore was untimely under the applicable medical-malpractice deadline.

The court rejected Ollison’s argument that time spent in custody extended the filing period. It concluded that he was not in custody when Highland rejected his claim and that the cited tolling provision did not apply to the Government Claims Act deadline.

Additional procedural issue and disposition

The court also noted that Ollison had not complied with California’s procedural requirements for a successor in interest or personal representative pursuing claims that belonged to a deceased person. Those requirements include establishing standing to sue in a representative capacity and filing specified documents and declarations. The court identified this noncompliance but its stated grounds for dismissal were that there was no EMTALA claim after inpatient admission and that the state claims were time barred.

The court granted Alameda Health’s motion to dismiss. It was not certain that Ollison could cure the defects, but it allowed him to file an amended complaint by January 11, 2021.