Cichos v. Dakota Eye Institute, P.C.

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court held that a physician does not owe third parties a duty to warn a patient about driving risks arising from the patient's medical condition under the circumstances alleged. The Court further held that the patient's purely economic medical malpractice claim was assignable and that the expert affidavit sufficiently supported a prima facie case under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46. The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Holdings

1. Under the circumstances alleged, a physician has no duty to third parties arising from the physician's failure to warn a patient about driving risks resulting from the patient's medical condition.
2. Lima's medical malpractice claim was assignable because, as presented, it was a purely economic claim for reimbursement and did not seek recovery for personal injury to Lima.
3. The timely affidavit satisfied the low threshold of N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46 because it identified the expert's address and expertise and provided a sufficient summary supporting the standard of care, breach, and causation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a physician owes third parties a duty to warn a patient about driving risks resulting from the patient's medical condition.
2. Whether Lima's purely economic medical malpractice claim for reimbursement of amounts owed to the injured parties was assignable.
3. Whether the plaintiffs' medical expert affidavit satisfied N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46 sufficiently to avoid dismissal.

Disposition

other