2 total
Medical negligence claim over opioid dosing dismissed; physician met standard of care.
The plaintiffs brought a medical negligence action alleging that a hospitalist physician negligently prescribed excessive doses of hydromorphone (Dilaudid) to a patient who had previously received morphine and was allegedly opioid‑naive.
The patient died several hours after receiving multiple doses of Dilaudid, and the coroner’s report listed the cause of death as acute mixed hydromorphone and morphine intoxication.
The court heard competing expert evidence regarding opioid equivalency ratios, titration practices, and whether the physician’s 5 mg dosing fell below the standard of care for a hospitalist managing severe uncontrolled pain.
The court preferred the defence experts’ evidence that the dosing decision was a reasonable clinical judgment given the patient’s persistent severe pain and lack of response to morphine, and that reliance on experienced nurses for monitoring was appropriate.
The court also found the clinical course inconsistent with opioid toxicity and concluded the plaintiffs had not proven causation on a balance of probabilities.
The negligence claim was dismissed.
Arbitration application not time-barred where insurer failed to provide clear and unequivocal refusal of benefits.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits until the insurer terminated them.
The insurer argued the applicant's subsequent application for arbitration was time-barred under the Insurance Act and the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
The arbitrator found that the insurer's explanation of assessment did not constitute a clear and unequivocal refusal of benefits, and the insurer failed to prove when the applicant received it.
Furthermore, the application was filed within 90 days of the mediator's report.
The arbitrator concluded the arbitration was brought in a timely manner and the applicant was entitled to proceed.
