WASHINGTON Sacramento Valley native Dean Patrick Witt died unnecessarily at Travis Air Force Base seven years ago. Now, his name momentarily haunts the U.S. Supreme Court.

Today justices will consider the death of Dean Witt and its connection to the controversial legal doctrine that shields military personnel from lawsuits.

“If the court chooses to re-examine this issue, thousands of service members would finally have the opportunity to have their day in court,” said Laurie Higginbotham, an attorney for the late Air Force staff sergeant’s widow, Alexis.

The case challenges a 61-year-old rule that protects the federal government against lawsuits by military personnel injured on active duty. Those protected can include, as in Witt’s case, military nurses and doctors who may have acted negligently.

The lawsuit immunity potentially saves the federal government from having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars annually. It avoids judges second-guessing military decisions.

But sometimes, it also compels judges to lament their own rulings.

“A 25-year-old man who devoted his life to serving his country is dead through no fault of his own and his widow cannot sue to recover for her loss,” Sacramento-based U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez wrote in February 2009 when he reluctantly rejected a Witt family lawsuit.

The result, Mendez added, “can only be characterized as unfair and irrational.”

In the closed-door session today, Supreme Court justices will decide whether to accept the Witt family’s case and conduct a full hearing next term. Most Supreme Court petitions fail; a decision should be made public Monday.

Born in Yuba City, Witt graduated from Oroville High School and then joined the Air Force. In September 2001, he married Alexis.

In October 2003, Witt was at Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, preparing to move his wife and two young children from Utah. He began feeling severe pain in his lower right abdomen and went to the base’s David Grant Medical Center, where doctors diagnosed him with acute appendicitis.

On Oct. 10, 2003, doctors operated successfully. Then, Witt began having difficulty breathing.

He turned blue. A nurse mistakenly tried to use pediatric equipment to open his airway. It failed.

The nurse next found the right breathing tube, but placed it in Witt’s esophagus rather than his trachea. For several crucial minutes, no oxygen reached Witt’s brain. He collapsed into a persistent vegetative state. He died Jan. 9, 2004, after being disconnected from life-saving machinery.

The supervising nurse subsequently admitted error and surrendered her license. If Witt were a civilian, his family would probably have a slam-dunk malpractice case.

But in three 1950 cases, one involving an Army surgeon leaving a 30-inch towel inside a patient’s abdomen, the Supreme Court specified that military personnel could not sue for injuries occurring “incident to service.”

Current Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal said active-duty medical malpractice suits “could substantially disrupt the military mission .”

He added that the Witt family already has received federal benefits: $250,000 from life insurance, a $100,000 death payment and tax-free monthly payments for Alexis Witt and her two children.

Congress could change the rules, but it would be expensive. Legislation that would allow medical malpractice lawsuits by military personnel would result in an additional 750 lawsuits annually and cost the government an estimated $2.7 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Similar Posts:

Share