M.G. v. A.I. DuPont Hospital for Children, et al.

Case Updates

The Third Circuit dismissed medical monitoring claims by plaintiffs who failed to demonstrate that a hospital's use of an experimental stent exposed the plaintiffs to potential health risks. The court declined to predict whether Delaware would adopt medical monitoring as a cause of action in the absence of a present physical injury, but concluded that even if Delaware were to recognize medical monitoring, the plaintiffs could not recover under the criteria that apply in most states.

NCLC urged the Third Circuit to hold that Delaware law does not recognize claims for medical monitoring absent a proven physical injury. In this case, the plaintiff seeks medical monitoring for unforeseen complications from a stent that did not have approval from the Food and Drug Administration. NCLC argued that Supreme Court precedent rejects medical monitoring claims absent a present injury. NCLC warned that a favorable ruling for the plaintiff would encourage the plaintiffs’ bar to clog the court system with meritless lawsuits.