Quick Summary: A nurse's lawsuit against an attending physician arose from an incident where a violent medical/surgical patient suffering from delirium tremens attacked and injured his nurse.  The court dismissed the lawsuit.

   The patient had exhibited violent behavior twice before the incident in question during the three days he had been a patient on the unit. Each of these incidents were reported to the attending physician who would later be the defendant in the nurse’s lawsuit.

   The nurse's suit alleged the attending physician was guilty of negligence, for having admitted this patient to the medical/surgical unit of the hospital instead of the psychiatric unit, for not transferring the patient to the psychiatric unit upon learning of his violent behavior, and for failing to warn the nurse of the patient's violent propensities.

   The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division's ruling stated that, "Embedded in the law of this state is the proposition that a duty of reasonable care to the plaintiff by the tortfeasor (the person accused of civil negligence) is elemental to any recovery of damages for negligence. Foreseeability of injury does not determine the existence of a legal duty. ... The legal duty of one member of society owed to another is a legal issue to be determined by the court as a matter of law. It is not for the jury's determination on a case-by-case basis."

   According to the court, "A defendant generally has no duty to control the conduct of third persons so as to prevent them from harming others, even when as a practical matter the defendant has the power to exercise such control. ... A physician's duty of care is ordinarily one owed to his or her patient. ... A physician has a duty of care toward a patient, but does not have a duty of care to the community at large."

  Public policy considerations, according to the court, required a finding that the defendant doctor in this case owed no duty to "the public at large" or to this nurse in particular to control the behavior of this patient.

   The patient was being treated for drug and alcohol abuse. Often patients undergoing withdrawal from these toxic substances will, in severe cases, manifestbizarre behavior, according to the court, but this did not change the court's decision.

  The court stated that the nurse was not at particular risk,compared with other care-givers, since this patient had not specifically threatened her prior to the assault. She was, therefore, considered a member of "the general public," and was not within the class of people to whom the physician owed a duty of protection from this patient.