Wrongful Death Claim Stands, Lost Chance Rejected in OR Ruling

In Martineau v. McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center, the Supreme Court of Oregon reviewed a wrongful death action involving allegations of medical negligence. The case focused on the appropriateness of a jury instruction regarding physician negligence and whether a separate lost chance claim could be maintained under Oregon's survival statute.

In 2014, Aaron Martineau sought treatment at McKenzie-Willamette Hospital for chest pain and shortness of breath. He was examined by a physician assistant and a physician associated with Doctor's Emergency Room Corporation, P.C., and a chest x-ray was reviewed by a radiologist with Radiology Associates, P.C. Aaron was diagnosed with noncardiac chest pain and discharged. He died approximately 24 hours later from an aortic dissection.

Jamie Martineau, as personal representative of Aaron's estate, filed claims alleging that the emergency room and radiology defendants were negligent in failing to diagnose and treat Aaron's condition properly. She brought a wrongful death claim under ORS 30.020 and a separate lost chance claim under ORS 30.075.

Trial Court and Court of Appeals Proceedings

The trial court dismissed the lost chance claim before trial. The wrongful death claim proceeded, and the jury was instructed that physicians are not negligent merely because their efforts were unsuccessful and do not guarantee a good result by providing services. The jury found the emergency room defendants negligent but concluded their negligence did not cause damages. The radiology defendants were found not negligent.

The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the jury instruction misleading and the dismissal of the lost chance claim improper. It concluded that the lost chance claim was viable under Oregon law and the survival statute.

Supreme Court Decision

The Supreme Court first evaluated the jury instruction based on UCJI 44.03. It determined that the instruction accurately stated the law and was not misleading when considered with the other instructions provided. The Court noted that adverse outcomes alone do not establish negligence and that the instruction appropriately reinforced that standard.

The Court then addressed the lost chance claim. It explained that wrongful death actions under ORS 30.020 govern when alleged wrongful conduct results in death, and survival actions under ORS 30.075 govern when injuries do not result in death. The Court found that Jamie Martineau's lost chance claim could not be brought separately under the survival statute because the allegations centered on conduct that allegedly caused death. Instead, any damages for the loss of chance needed to be included in the wrongful death action without seeking attorney fees under the survival statute.

The Court concluded that Jamie Martineau did not sufficiently allege a lost chance claim under the standards set by prior cases. She did not plead the percentage or quality of the lost chance, nor specify how the alleged negligence caused a diminished outcome distinct from death. As a result, the dismissal of the lost chance claim was affirmed.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the trial court's judgment. It upheld the use of the challenged jury instruction and determined that no separate lost chance claim was properly alleged under the survival statute. The decision clarified the procedures for asserting claims related to lost chances and wrongful death under Oregon law.

How We Can Help

If you have questions about filing a wrongful death claim, the team at Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC is available to assist.  Whether you need guidance on eligibility to file a claim or understanding what damages may be recoverable, our team is ready to support you through each step of the process.