Stringer v. Trapp


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2008-CA-01192-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 03-18-2010
Opinion Author: Kitchens, J.
Holding: Reversed and remanded

Additional Case Information: Topic: Medical malpractice - Statute of limitations - Section 15-1-36(1) - Discovery rule
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Graves, P.JJ., Dickinson, Randolph, Lamar, Chandler and Pierce, JJ.
Procedural History: Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE; Dismissal

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-23-2008
Appealed from: Clay County Circuit Court
Judge: Lee J. Howard
Disposition: This medical malpractice action was dismissed because the trial court determined that the statute of limitations had run before the filing of the complaint.
Case Number: 2007-0004

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: MICHAEL STRINGER AS NATURAL FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND OF ALICIA STRINGER, A MINOR




WILLIAM W. FULGHAM, ERIN S. ROGERS



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief
  • Appellant #1 Reply Brief

  • Appellee: JAMES T. TRAPP, M.D. ROBERT K. UPCHURCH, JOSHUA SHEY WISE  

    Synopsis provided by:

    If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
    hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

    Topic: Medical malpractice - Statute of limitations - Section 15-1-36(1) - Discovery rule

    Summary of the Facts: The father of Alicia Stringer filed suit on her behalf against North Mississippi Medical Center, Dr. Timothy Whittle, and Dr. Steve Noggle, alleging that they were negligent by failing to diagnose and properly treat Stringer’s appendicitis. The initial complaint did not name Dr. James Trapp as a defendant, but noted that he had performed a CT scan on Stringer and had prepared a CT report, which was supplemented by an addendum. Two years and sixty-one days after Stringer’s emergency appendectomy, the plaintiff amended her complaint, adding Dr. Trapp as a defendant. Dr. Trapp moved for dismissal. The trial court ordered that the motion to dismiss be converted into a motion for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Dr. Trapp and pursuant to M.R.C.P. 54(b), ruled this a final judgment for the purposes of appeal. Stringer appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Dr. Trapp argues that the statute of limitations began to run on January 12, 2005, when Stringer discovered she needed an appendectomy rather than a hysterectomy. Stringer argues that, although she was aware of the potential misdiagnosis on January 12, 2005, the statute of limitations with regard to Dr. Trapp did not begin to run on that date, because she had never met with Dr. Trapp, nor had she been aware of his involvement with her treatment. Section 15-1-36(1) provides that an action for medical malpractice must be brought within two years from the date the alleged act, omission or neglect shall or with reasonable diligence might have been first known or discovered. The statute of limitations is tolled by the discovery rule until the plaintiff has knowledge of the injury, has knowledge of the cause of the injury, and knows the relationship between the practitioner and the injury. Dr. Trapp argues that the discovery rule should not apply to toll the statute of limitations, because the plaintiff discovered she had appendicitis, a known nonlatent injury, on January 12, 2005, during emergency surgery. However, if the patient has no reason to know that the doctor's negligence in performing the procedure caused the complications, the discovery rule will apply, even though the injury itself is not latent at all. Dr. Trapp makes no assertion that Stringer was made aware of his involvement in her treatment until she received her medical records on April 14, 2005. Moreover, Dr. Trapp concedes that Stringer exercised reasonable diligence in seeking her medical records. Yet the factual questions of what the plaintiff knew and when remain unanswered. Accordingly, the trial court erred in dismissing the cause of action against Dr. Trapp at the summary judgment level.


    Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court