The plaintiff brought medical malpractice claims in the Massachusetts Superior Court against three physicians and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH). The plaintiff alleged that he suffered injuries in a fall at MGH after radiologist Allen P. Heeger, D.O. ordered that two nitroglycerin patches be administered to him. The plaintiff alleged that Heeger was negligent in failing to notify him and the nurses caring for him that the patches created a risk that the plaintiff “would be susceptible to syncope upon rising from his hospital bed.”
A Massachusetts medical malpractice tribunal concluded, based on the plaintiff’s offer of proof, that the plaintiff’s injuries were “merely an unfortunate medical result” and were not “sufficient to raise a legitimate question of liability appropriate for judicial inquiry.” The Superior Court judge dismissed the claims after the plaintiff failed to post the statutory bond, and the plaintiff appealed.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court stated in its April 21, 2026 Memorandum And Order: “In his brief to the tribunal, the plaintiff “decided to rely on MGH’s own expert investigation” and on information about the nitroglycerin patches, rather than employing an expert witness. We assume without deciding that (1) the letters from Deen [associate chief and patient safety officer at MGH] to the plaintiff and (2) the reports prepared by an MGH “compliance specialist” for presentation to the Department of Public Health were admissible at the tribunal hearing. But see G. L. c. 12C, § 15 (e). The record does not establish that either Deen, as the author of the letters to the plaintiff, or the compliance specialist who prepared MGH’s mandatory report of the plaintiff’s fall as a “Serious Reportable Event” had “sufficient ‘education, training, experience and familiarity’ with” the “proper standard of care” to define that standard or to opine on whether the defendants deviated from it … [W]e conclude that the plaintiff failed to make the required showing before the tribunal. This is primarily because the plaintiff’s offer of proof failed to establish that the defendants’ performance “did not conform to good medical practice.””
“This is not one of the “exceptional cases” in which a lay person could rely on “common knowledge and experience” to identify the standard of care and determine whether the defendants deviated from it … whether the standard of care required the average qualified radiologist to provide additional fall warnings to the plaintiff or the nurses caring for him after ordering the application of two nitroglycerin patches is not within the knowledge of an average lay person. Indeed, the plaintiff’s complaint and offer of proof made this point by highlighting that a number of factors, related to his situation and the particular medication administered, increased the likelihood that the medication led to the dizziness that caused him to fall and injure his hand.”
“Because the plaintiff’s offer of proof lacked an expert opinion identifying the applicable standard of care and “how each defendant ‘failed to adhere to [it],'” the offer of proof “[fell] short of raising a legitimate question of liability appropriate for judicial inquiry as to each defendant. The plaintiff’s offer of proof accordingly was insufficient … Accordingly, we affirm the tribunal’s finding and the judgment of dismissal.”
Source Snyder vs. Massachusetts General Hospital, 25-P-733.
If you or a loved one may have been injured (or worse) by medical malpractice in Massachusetts or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find a Massachusetts medical malpractice attorney, or a medical malpractice attorney 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 lawyers in your U.S. state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
