The New York Court of Appeals recently held that a New York statute requiring health clubs to have Automatic External Defibrillator’s (AED) did not require health clubs to use the device. Miglino v. Bally Total Fitness, 2013 NY Slip Op. 00780, New York Court of Appeals Decided February 7, 2013.
On March 26, 2007 Gregory Miglino (“Miglino”) collapsed at a health club owned and operated by the Bally Total Fitness (“Bally”). A Bally employee immediately called 9-1-1 and brought the club’s AED to Miglino. Two club members, a doctor and medical student performed CPR on Miglino. The AED-trained Bally employee deferred to the doctor and neither of them used the device. Shortly thereafter Emergency Medical Technicians arrived and were unsuccessful in reviving Miglino.
Miglino’s estate sued Bally’s alleging the health club had a statutory and common law duty to use the AED. Specifically, the estate alleged that New York General Business Law § 627-a, requiring health clubs to have on premises at least one AED and at least one individual holding a valid certification to operate the AED, created a duty on the health club to use the device. Bally filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that it was immune from liability under Public Health Law § 3000-a, the State’s Good Samaritan Law, which protects volunteers who supply first aid or emergency treatment outside a medical facility from liability.
The lower courts denied Bally’s motion to dismiss finding Gen. Bus. Law § 627-a imposed an affirmative duty of care upon the facility and that Bally assumed a common law duty by coming to the aid of Miglino.
On appeal, the New York Court of Appeals held that N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 627-a did not create a duty running from the health club to its members to use an AED. The Court also noted that because the statute identified anyone trained to use the AED as a "volunteer,” under Pub. H. Law. § 3000-a, anyone who "voluntarily" used the device was provided Good Samaritan protection. With respect to the estate’s allegations of common law liability, the Court noted that, historically, health clubs owe a limited duty of care to patrons, and that while the claim would most likely be resolved in Bally’s favor by way of summary judgment; the estate had pleaded a viable cause of action sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.
A copy of the decision may be obtained by clicking here.