The plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against two physicians following the death of her father.
The plaintiff, acting as her father's substitute decision-maker, had requested that he be treated as 'full code'.
However, the physicians determined that the patient was actively dying and that CPR would almost certainly not benefit him and would only cause harm.
They wrote a 'do not resuscitate' order without the plaintiff's prior consent.
The plaintiff claimed damages under the Family Law Act and for nervous shock.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the action, finding that the physicians met the standard of care, that writing a DNR order is not a 'treatment' requiring consent under the Health Care Consent Act, and that the physicians did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff that would conflict with their paramount duty to their patient.
