## Facts

- Sidney Lundy, a 66-year-old casino patron with coronary artery disease, suffered cardiac arrest and collapsed while gambling at TropWorld Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey.
- Nearby patrons, including a critical care nurse and a physician, began resuscitation efforts within moments.
- Casino personnel summoned an on-premises nurse, Margaret Slusher, who arrived within about two minutes with oxygen and an ambu-bag but no intubation kit.
- The physician-patron requested an intubation tube; the nurse did not have one at the scene, and casino policy did not provide intubation equipment to her because she was not qualified to intubate (though an intubation kit was located elsewhere on the premises).
- Paramedics arrived within minutes, intubated Lundy, and revived him; Lundy was left with permanent disabilities.
- Sidney and Claire Lundy sued TropWorld in federal court (diversity), alleging negligence for failing to have a full-time on-site physician and for failing to provide more advanced emergency treatment and equipment.
- After the limitations period ran, plaintiffs sought to amend the complaint to add the casino’s on-call/in-house physician, Dr. Domenic Frank Carlino, as a defendant.

## Issues

1. Under New Jersey law, what duty does a business owner owe to a patron who becomes ill on the premises: only basic first aid and reasonable steps to obtain medical assistance, or also advanced emergency treatment and an on-site physician?
2. Does New Jersey’s Good Samaritan Act impose or imply an affirmative duty on a business to maintain personnel and equipment capable of advanced emergency procedures such as intubation?
3. Did the proposed amendment adding Dr. Carlino relate back under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) despite the statute of limitations, based on notice and “mistake” requirements?

## Decision

- The Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for TropWorld.
- The court held TropWorld’s duty to an ill patron was, at most, to provide basic first aid when the need became apparent and to take reasonable steps to procure appropriate medical care.
- The court held TropWorld had no duty to provide an on-site physician or to furnish/perform advanced emergency procedures such as intubation.
- The court held New Jersey’s Good Samaritan Act did not impose a duty to maintain advanced medical personnel or equipment; it limits liability for those who voluntarily render aid.
- The court affirmed denial of leave to amend to add Dr. Carlino because the claims were time-barred and did not relate back under Rule 15(c).

## Legal Principles

- A New Jersey business owner’s duty to a patron who becomes ill is generally limited to providing basic first aid and taking reasonable steps to obtain professional medical assistance.
- Absent a special relationship, statute, or undertaking creating a broader obligation, a business is not required to provide advanced emergency medical treatment or keep a physician on-site.
- Good Samaritan statutes ordinarily operate as liability shields for voluntary emergency assistance and do not create affirmative duties to provide emergency medical resources.
- Under Rule 15(c), an amendment adding a new defendant after limitations may relate back only if, within the Rule 4(m) service period, the new defendant (1) received notice of the action sufficient to avoid prejudice and (2) knew or should have known that, but for a mistake about identity, the action would have been brought against it.
- A plaintiff’s failure to sue a potential defendant within the limitations period due to later-discovered involvement is not, by itself, a “mistake” that satisfies Rule 15(c).

## Conclusion

The court held that the casino satisfied its limited duty by providing prompt basic aid and summoning emergency responders, and it rejected efforts to impose a higher duty to deliver advanced medical care; it also refused relation back for a late-added physician where timely notice and a qualifying “mistake” were not shown.


Lundy v. Adamar of N.J., Inc., 34 F.3d 1173 (3d Cir. 1994)