Before Justices Cherry, Pickering, and Hardesty.
Opinion by Justice Cherry.
In this appeal, the court examined the duty of care owed by a medical facility when performing nonmedical functions. The Named Appellant, as guardian for a cognitively impaired adult, appealed the district court’s dismissal of a negligence action brought against a senior care facility in connection with the execution of a power of attorney that resulted in Appellant being injured by a third party. An employee of Respondent facilitated a power of attorney in favor of a third party, which
was signed by Appellant. The third party financially exploited Appellant, and
Appellant sued Respondent for breaching its duty of care by allowing Appellant
to sign the power of attorney, when a reasonable investigation would have
established that Appellant lacked the requisite mental competence to protect
herself from exploitation. The district court dismissed the claim pursuant to a
NRCP 12(b)(5) motion, finding that Respondent owed Appellant no duty beyond
providing competent medical care. On appeal, the Supreme Court overturned
the dismissal, establishing that because immunity from general liability cannot
be enjoyed simply due to one’s legal status, medical facilities are required to
conform to normal standards of reasonableness under general principles of tort
law when performing nonmedical functions. Because potential factual issues
existed as to whether Respondent acted negligently in carrying out nonmedical
functions, the court reversed and remanded. (Mark Dunagan, Associate in the Reno office of McDonald Carano Wilson LLP).
