Opinion
C.A. No. 10C-11-001 JTV.
Submitted: January 14, 2010.
Decided: April 15, 2011.
Upon Consideration of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss.
GRANTED.
Robert M. Jones, Pro Se.
William J. Cattie, III, Esq., Rawle Henderson, LLC., Wilmington, Delaware. Attorney for Defendant.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, the plaintiff's opposition, and the record of the case, it appears that:
1. The plaintiff, Robert Jones, has filed a complaint alleging medical negligence, Medicaid or Medicare fraud, and improper denial of access to his medical file. The defendant is Psychotherapeutic Community Systems Association. The plaintiff was treated at PCSA for psychological problems.
2. The plaintiff's primary contention is that PCSA improperly placed him on medication that was both ineffective and a danger to his health. He alleges that he had a medical condition which occasionally caused him to have seizures. He contends that the defendant knew of this condition, but ignored the fact that the medication he was placed upon increased the likelihood of seizures. The plaintiff contends that he experienced a large increase in seizures; yet, PCSA kept him on the medication. Additionally, he claims that PCSA knowingly left him on the medication although they understood the harm it was causing. The plaintiff also contends that the defendant submitted bills for Medicaid or Medicare services which were not rendered. He contends that the defendant committed Medicaid or Medicare fraud. The plaintiff also asserts a claim for review of his medical records.
3. In support of its motion, the defendant contends that the healthcare negligence claim must be dismissed because the complaint is not accompanied by an Affidavit of Merit. The defendant also contends that the Medicaid or Medicare fraud claim must be dismissed because this Court does not have jurisdiction over such claims. The defendant also contends that this Court lacks jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim for review of his medical records.
4. The standard of review under Rule 12(b)(6) is a familiar one. Upon a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, a complaint is subjected to a broad test of sufficiency. Dismissal is appropriate only if it is reasonably certain "that the plaintiff could not prove any set of facts that would entitle [him] to relief." The complaint will not be dismissed unless it clearly lacks factual or legal merit. When considering a motion to dismiss, the court will accept all well-pleaded allegations as true. In addition, every reasonable factual inference will be drawn in favor of the plaintiff. The complaint must, however, contain "sufficient facts to state a recognizable claim."
See C J Paving, Inc. v. Hickory Commons, LLC, 2006 WL 3898268, at *1 (Del. Super.).
Ramunno v. Crawley, 705 A.2d 1029, 1034 (Del. 1998) (citing Spence v. Funk, 396 A.2d 967, 968 (Del. 1978)).
Diamond State Tel. Co. v. Univ. of Del., 269 A.2d 52, 58 (Del. 1970).
Spence, 396 A.2d at 968.
Doe v. Cahill, 884 A.2d 451, 458 (Del. 2005).
In re Walt Disney Co. Deriv. Litig, 825 A.2d 275, 285 (Del. Ch. 2003).
5. All healthcare negligence complaints must be accompanied by an Affidavit of Merit, with certain exceptions. The plaintiff's complaint does not fall within an exception. Therefore, the plaintiff's claims based upon healthcare negligence must be dismissed.
6. Claims for Medicaid or Medicare fraud are not within the subject matter jurisdiction of this Court. Such claims fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts. Therefore, the Medicaid or Medicare fraud claim must be dismissed.
Giles v. United States, 233 Fed. Appx. 987 (C.A. Fed. 2007).
7. Finally, a person's right to review medical records is contained in 16 Del. C. § 5182(14). Jurisdiction over an action to enforce the right to review medical records is given by statute to the Court of Chancery. Therefore, the plaintiff's medical record review claim must be dismissed from this Court, subject to the plaintiff's right to transfer that claim to the Court of Chancery pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 1902.
8. For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff's motion to dismiss the complaint is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.