Case Study: Delia v. E.M.A. et al Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxxx
University of Maryland University College
HCAD 650 Fall 2012
October 5, 2013

Case Study: Delia v. E.M.A. et al
This paper reviews a case study of a medical malpractice suit that resulted in a claim against the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services for their practice of recovering settlements paid for medical expenses. Legal controversies with medical impact rarely reach the United States Supreme Court because such cases must go through several levels of hearings and appeals before even being considered by the Supreme Court. Medical issues must involve interpretation of the US Constitution or federal law, and at least four of the nine justices must agree to accept a case. The Supreme Court reviews only a small percentage of the several thousand cases submitted each year. Consequently, most medical controversies at law take place in state courts.
Subject
United States Supreme Court Case No. 12-98. Albert A. Delia, Secretary, North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services v. E.M.A., a Minor, By and Through Her Guardian ad Litem, Daniel H. Johnson, et al. Later the case was changed to: No. 12-98. Aldona Wos, Secretary, North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Petitioner v. E.M.A., a Minor, By and Through Her Guardian ad Litem, Daniel H. Johnson, et al. The purpose of the case was to resolve the conflict between the opinions of the 4th U. S. Court of Appeals in this case and the decision of the North Carolina Supreme Court in Andrews, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and the case was present on January 8, 2013. Justice Anthony Kennedy authored and delivered the opinion of the court.
Facts
The facts presented in the case are as follows (Wos v. E.M.A., 2013). On February 25, 2000, Emily M. Armstrong (E.M.A.), daughter of Sandra and William