Opinion ID: 197484
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: 2 This case arose out of an automobile accident in which Peter Puzzanghera, an outpatient at the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Bedford, Massachusetts (VAMC) rear ended Magee. As a result of the accident, Magee suffered physical injuries and property damage for which he seeks damages from the federal government. By way of background, we describe the relationship between the Veterans Administration (VA) and Puzzanghera in order to explain how Magee came to sue the United States. 3 Puzzanghera has long battled chronic, paranoid schizophrenia. In August, 1988 he was involuntarily committed to Metropolitan State Hospital. In July, 1989, he was transferred to VAMC where he remained as an inpatient until late June, 1990. On June 20, 1990, he was discharged to the Fort Hill Community Care Home and continued to receive treatment at VAMC on an outpatient basis. 4 Puzzanghera's treatment at VAMC included periodic intermuscular injections of Prolixin Decanoate (Prolixin). VAMC physicians prescribed Prolixin to help Puzzanghera manage his schizophrenia. Following the onset of this treatment, Puzzanghera experienced restlessness and difficulty in moving his tongue, side effects that his doctors have attributed to the Prolixin. 5 VAMC has established a policy entitled Veterans Driver Evaluation Program for the purpose of aiding veterans in obtaining driver's licenses from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV). Pursuant to this policy, VA doctors refer selected patients whose rehabilitative prospects might be enhanced by having a driver's permit or license to a VA psychologist for evaluation as to suitability. Depending on the outcome of this evaluation, the psychologist either determines that the patient is not a suitable candidate for a license, or submits a letter of support to the RMV on behalf of the patient. The letter details the patient's medical treatment and indicates that beyond the information in the letter, the VA knows of no contraindication to the RMV's consideration of the patient for restoration or continuance of driving privileges. The VA acknowledges in the letter, however, that the final decision regarding a given patient's driving privileges rests with the RMV. 6 At some time prior to April 1990, Puzzanghera requested his treating physician, Dr. Albert Gaw, to assist him in obtaining a driver's license. Dr. Gaw referred Puzzanghera to Dr. Robert Avey, a counselling psychologist at VAMC. After Dr. Avey evaluated Puzzanghera, he sent a letter to the RMV on his behalf. Puzzanghera subsequently received driving privileges. 7 In the afternoon of October 29, 1990, while Magee sat in his car at a red light, Puzzanghera rear ended Magee's car, causing bodily injury to Magee and damage to his vehicle. A police officer who arrived shortly after the accident noted that Puzzanghera appeared very slow and deliberate in his actions. The officer performed two field sobriety tests which Puzzanghera passed with no problem. Puzzanghera informed the officer that he was an outpatient at VAMC and had recently received a shot of Prolixin. In fact, Puzzanghera had received this shot approximately four hours prior to the accident. 8 Magee filed a complaint against the United States under the FTCA in which he alleged that the VA negligently allowed or enabled Puzzanghera to qualify for and obtain a driver's license while on Prolixin, negligently failed to warn Puzzanghera of the side effects of Prolixin, negligently failed to properly monitor and supervise Puzzanghera's Prolixin treatment, and negligently fail[ed] in other respects that will be shown at trial. According to Magee, the VA's negligence caused his injuries. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the United States on all of Magee's allegations. This appeal followed.