Mclean v. Bronxcare Health System
- Sarah Netburn
- 1:20-cv-08189
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In McLean v. United States, Judge Carter granted the government’s motion in part, dismissing three claims for missing administrative exhaustion or plaintiff’s consent.
Jonathan McLean and the United States; the ruling dismissed McLean’s informed-consent, negligent hiring/training/supervision, and vicarious-liability claims.
What happened
In Jonathan McLean v. United States, McLean sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act over medical treatment he received at Bronx-Lebanon hospital and later complications, including multiple amputations.
The United States asked the court to dismiss McLean’s informed-consent and negligent hiring, training, and supervision claims because he had not included them in his required administrative claim. McLean also agreed to remove his vicarious-liability claim.
The court dismissed the informed-consent and negligent hiring, training, and supervision claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and dismissed the vicarious-liability claim. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. granted the government’s motion to dismiss in part and denied McLean’s separate letter motion.
The detailed version
- Mclean v. Bronxcare Health System · No. 1:20-cv-08189
- Sarah Netburn
- Mar. 31, 2022
Background
Jonathan McLean sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, a law that allows certain claims against the federal government for harm caused by its employees or agents. He asserted negligence, vicarious liability, and lack of informed consent based on medical care at the federally funded Bronx-Lebanon hospital and affiliated facilities.
According to the allegations accepted for purposes of the motion, McLean went to the emergency room on January 9, 2019, with elevated blood sugar and increased urination. He was diagnosed with, among other conditions, a urinary tract infection involving E. coli bacteria resistant to several drugs. The complaint alleged that he was prescribed ciprofloxacin even though the bacteria was resistant to that medication and that the infection was not properly treated. He later developed severe medical complications and underwent amputations involving both lower extremities, both thumbs, and his right index finger.
Before filing suit, McLean submitted an administrative claim to the Department of Health and Human Services seeking $15 million. The claim described alleged failures to diagnose, treat, monitor, and prescribe medication for his urinary tract infection. It did not mention informed consent or negligent hiring, training, or supervision.
The Court’s Analysis
The Federal Tort Claims Act requires a claimant to first present an administrative claim to the appropriate federal agency. The claim must provide enough information for the government to investigate the allegations and estimate their value. The court treated failure to meet this requirement as a jurisdictional defect, meaning the court could not decide the affected claims.
The court concluded that McLean’s administrative claim did not provide enough information to investigate alleged negligent hiring, training, or supervision because it focused on the medical treatment itself. The court also found that the claim did not allege that medical providers failed to disclose treatment risks, benefits, or alternatives, or that a fully informed person would have declined treatment. The court therefore concluded that the informed-consent claim had not been exhausted.
McLean agreed in his opposition brief to remove his vicarious-liability claim. The court dismissed that claim on that basis.
Disposition
The court granted the United States’ motion to dismiss the complaint in part. It dismissed the informed-consent and negligent hiring, training, and supervision claims under Rule 12(b)(1) for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and it dismissed the vicarious-liability claim after McLean consented to its removal. The opinion does not state that these dismissals were with or without prejudice. The court also denied McLean’s letter motion at ECF No. 16 and directed the parties to file a joint status letter within fourteen days regarding next steps. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. signed the order on March 31, 2022.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.