Marietta Attorneys Dean Phillips Law Office

Dean Phillips Law Office

341 Lawrence Street
Marietta, GA 30060
770-900-9175

  • Home
  • Practice Areas
    • Criminal Defense Attorney
      • Assault & Battery
      • Bench Warrants
      • Burglary
      • Bail Bonds
      • Drug Crimes
      • Hit and Run
      • Homicide
      • Juvenile Defense
      • Misdemeanors
      • Probation Violations
      • Resisting Arrest
      • Sex Offenses & Rape
      • Stalking
      • Theft
      • Weapons Offenses
      • White Collar Crimes
    • Divorce
    • DUI Defense
    • Georgia Gun Trust
    • Gun Trust
    • Personal Injury
      • Brain Spinal Cord Injuries
      • Dog Bites
      • Distracted Driver
      • Medical Malpractice
      • Motorcycle Accident
      • Pedestrian Bicycle Accidents
      • Personal Injury Compensation
      • Reckless Driver
      • Trucking Accidents
      • Wrongful Death
    • Traffic Violations
  • About the Attorney
  • Blog
  • Contact
You are here: Home / Criminal / Georgia’s Supreme Court Denies Immunity to Doctor Who Overrode Advance Directive

September 22, 2016

Georgia’s Supreme Court Denies Immunity to Doctor Who Overrode Advance Directive

A plaintiff in a medical malpractice suit contended that a hospital and doctor were negligent in following her grandmother’s advance directive when the doctor intubated her 91-year-old grandmother and placed her on mechanical ventilation. The plaintiff, who is also the designated health care agent, claimed that these procedures “prolonged her life when she was in a terminal condition and caused her unnecessary pain and suffering.”

The doctor and hospital named in the suit filed a motion for summary judgment, believing that they were protected by O.C.G.A. § 31-32-10 (a) (2) and (3). Richmond Superior Court denied the motion, and Georgia’s Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court’s assessment of what constitutes immunity under that statute. The Court was concerned that the defendants did not make a good faith effort in considering the health care agent’s decisions.

The defendants appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming that the Appeals Court misinterpreted the statute. The Supreme Court disagreed and stated that the purpose of the Advance Directive Act, from which the statute derives, was “to ensure that in making decisions about a patient’s health care, it is the will of the patient or her designated agent, rather than the will of the health care provider, that controls.” The Court further showed that the doctor’s actions demonstrated a lack of good faith reliance on the plaintiff’s requests, and immunity under the sections of the statute previously listed did not apply. The Supreme Court concurred with the Appeals Court in denying the motion for summary judgment.

Filed Under: Criminal

Contact Us

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Thirteen People Arrested in Major Drug Bust

After they executed several search warrants in central Georgia, authorities seized forty pounds of … [Read More...]

Is Domestic Violence a Big Deal?

It depends on who you ask. Most defendants don’t think domestic violence is a big deal, especially … [Read More...]

Breaking Down a Retail Theft Case in Cobb County

It’s a victimless crime. The store just writes off the loss. The rich manufacturer doesn’t care … [Read More...]

What Are the Crimes That Can Get You Deported?

Prior to 1924, between 10 and 15 percent of Americans were foreign born. Then, Congress passed the … [Read More...]

Collateral Consequences of Criminal Convictions

Direct consequences of criminal convictions include lengthy incarceration, high fines, and extended … [Read More...]

The Phillips Law Firm, LLC
341 Lawrence Street
Marietta, Georgia 30060
770-900-9175

Copyright © 2023 · Attorney Advertising. This website is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer client relationship.