## Facts

- In 1951, Roger Mozian was diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis by Dr. Matis, a New York medical doctor, and Mozian remained under Matis’s care for about ten years while the disease stayed dormant or arrested.
- In January 1962, an X-ray showed Mozian’s tuberculosis had become active, and Dr. Matis recommended hospitalization and medication; Mozian refused that course.
- Mozian instead sought treatment from Dr. Christopher Gian-Cursio, a New York-licensed chiropractic physician who practiced “Natural Hygiene.”
- Gian-Cursio knew Mozian had tuberculosis and recommended a “drugless” regimen: a full vegetarian diet with periods of fasting and no medications.
- Dr. Bernard M. Epstein, a Florida-licensed chiropractic physician, operated a home for patients in Dade County, Florida.
- On Gian-Cursio’s advice, Mozian went to Epstein’s Florida establishment and was treated there by Gian-Cursio and Epstein using the diet-and-fasting approach rather than recognized drug therapy for active pulmonary tuberculosis.
- After roughly six months under this regimen, Mozian was hospitalized and received drugs and other medical treatment for tuberculosis.
- Mozian died a few days after hospitalization, and the record reflected death from pulmonary tuberculosis.
- At trial, the prosecution presented evidence that the diet-and-fasting regimen was not an approved treatment for active tuberculosis and that standard drug therapy could have controlled the disease.
- The jury concluded that defendants’ treatment accelerated, rather than slowed, the tuberculosis, and found both defendants guilty of manslaughter based on culpable negligence.
- Gian-Cursio received a five-year sentence; Epstein’s sentence was suspended. Both moved for a new trial, and the trial court denied those motions.
- Defendants appealed; the appeals were consolidated in the Third District Court of Appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s finding that defendants’ treatment constituted culpable negligence that caused Mozian’s death (manslaughter).
2. Whether Gian-Cursio was entitled to reversal based on claimed trial errors, including evidentiary rulings, impeachment of a witness, and allegedly improper prosecutorial argument.

## Decision

- The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgments and sentences.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient to support the verdicts and judgments for manslaughter by culpable negligence.
- The court rejected Gian-Cursio’s additional claims of trial error, finding no reversible error in the trial court’s rulings or actions.

## Legal Principles

- Culpable negligence in a criminal case is a question of degree that may be left to the jury when supported by competent evidence.
- A jury may find proximate causation where the defendant’s conduct materially contributed to, hastened, or accelerated the victim’s death, even if the victim later receives conventional medical care.
- Claims of good faith in a nonstandard, drugless treatment method do not bar criminal liability if the jury can find the conduct was grossly negligent and likely to result in death or great bodily harm.
- On appeal, a conviction will not be reversed for alleged trial error absent a showing of reversible error in the rulings or proceedings.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the manslaughter convictions of Gian-Cursio and Epstein because the record allowed the jury to find that treating a patient with known active pulmonary tuberculosis through prolonged fasting and a vegetarian diet without recognized drug therapy constituted culpable negligence and was a legal cause of death, and because the asserted trial errors did not warrant a new trial.


Gian-Cursio v. State, 180 So. 2d 396 (1965)