Hospital Not Liable For Father’s Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress:
Background Facts
Clarisa Figueroa lured a young expectant mother to her home on the pretense of selling her baby clothes and, instead, murdered the mother, cut her unborn son from her womb, and claimed the baby as her own.
Figueroa called for emergency medical assistance, reporting that she had given birth unexpectedly at home. When the baby arrived at Advocate Christ Medical Center, he was not breathing. Doctors resuscitated him and admitted him into the neonatal intensive care unit. The hospital discharged Figueroa from the labor and delivery unit after three days.
She continued to make medical decisions on the baby’s behalf for two weeks, until Chicago Police detectives questioned the medical staff, prompting the baby’s neonatologist to take protective custody. Genetic testing confirmed that Figueroa was not the baby’s biological mother. Police subsequently arrested Figueroa for the murder of the baby’s mother.
Upon learning of his newborn son’s whereabouts, the baby’s father, Yovany Lopez Colunga, assumed responsibility for decisions pertaining to the baby’s medical care. The same doctors continued to care for the baby until his death one month later.
Colunga filed a lawsuit seeking damages based on intentional infliction of emotional distress against the medical providers who administered care to Figueroa and the baby at Advocate Christ Medical Center. According to plaintiff, the medical providers consciously disregarded the substantial risk of causing him to suffer severe emotional distress
when they permitted Figueroa to make medical decisions on the baby’s behalf despite the information in Figueroa’s medical records—including her age, lack of verifiable prenatal history, and prior tubal ligation—which should have indicated to the medical providers that she was physically unable to be the baby’s biological mother.
Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress
In Illinois, to state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, a plaintiff must allege facts
establishing that (1) the defendant’s conduct was extreme and outrageous, (2) the defendant either intended to inflict severe emotional distress or knew that there was a high probability that his conduct would cause emotional distress, and (3) the defendant’s conduct in fact caused severe emotional distress.
The Appellate Court of Illinois First Judicial District Fifth Division (“Illinois Appellate Court”) held in its Opinion filed on May 19, 2023: “Third-party claims may only be brought by a plaintiff who is present and who is either a family member or a non-family member who suffers bodily harm as a result of the tort … the “presence” requirement reflected in our cases and the Restatement functions as one of those limiting principles, denying recovery on questionable claims lacking the indicia of intent and genuine emotional harm that a plaintiff’s contemporaneous observance of the outrageous conduct guarantees … a defendant can have no liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress to a plaintiff who is unknown and not present.”
Source Colunga v. Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation, 2023 IL App (1st) 211386.
If you or a loved one may have been injured (or worse) as a result of medical negligence in Illinois or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find an Illinois medical malpractice lawyer, or a medical malpractice lawyer in your state, who may investigate your medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click here to visit our website or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find medical malpractice attorneys in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.