Delta Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Green


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-IA-00299-SCT
Linked Case(s): 2009-M-00299-SCT ; 2009-IA-00299-SCT
Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 07-22-2010
Opinion Author: Pierce, J.
Holding: Affirmed and remanded.
Additional Case Information: Topic: Medical malpractice - Tort Claims Act - Statute of limitations - Section 11-46-11(1) & (3) - Notice of claim
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Graves, P.JJ., Dickinson, Randolph, Lamar, Kitchens and Chandler, JJ.
Procedural History: Interlocutory Appeal; Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 02-10-2009
Appealed from: WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Judge: Richard Smith
Disposition: This case comes before the Court on interlocutory appeal from the Washington County Circuit Court. Milton Green filed a complaint against Delta Regional Medical Center (DRMC) alleging medical malpractice. DRMC filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that Green filed his complaint in violation of the 120-day tolling period found in Section 11-46- 11(3) of the Mississippi Code. DRMC argues that the circuit court erred when it denied DRMC’s motion to dismiss.
Case Number: 2008-0177CI
  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Delta Regional Medical Center




 L. CARL HAGWOOD, MARY FRANCES STALLINGS-ENGLAND



  
  • Appellant #1 Brief
  • Appellant #1 Reply Brief
    		•
    Appellee: Milton Green GEORGE F. HOLLOWELL, JR.  
    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 - Tort Claims Act - Statute of limitations - Section 11-46-11(1) & (3) - Notice of claim
    Summary of the Facts: Milton Green filed a complaint against Delta Regional Medical Center alleging medical malpractice. DRMC filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that Green filed his complaint in violation of the 120-day tolling period found in section 11-46-11(3). The court denied the motion to dismiss. DRMC filed an interlocutory appeal which the Court granted.
    Summary of Opinion Analysis: DRMC argues that the circuit court erred in denying DRMC’s motion to dismiss. DRMC bases its appeal on the ground that Green allegedly filed his complaint in violation of the 120-day tolling period found in section 11-46-11(3). Green argues that he followed the notice requirement in Section 11-46-11, as he waited more than ninety days to file his complaint under section 11-46-11-(1). Subsection (1) of 11-46-11 must be read in conjunction with subsection (3). Prior caselaw interpreting section 11-46-11 is ambiguous. Subsection (3) of section 11-46-11 contains the phrase “during which time no action may be maintained by the claimant unless the claimant has received a notice of denial of claim.” A close reading of subsection (3) and the quoted phrase leaves two plausible conclusions regarding when a claimant may file an action against a state agency or political subdivision. By one construction, a claimant is required to wait 95 or 120 days before filing the complaint. Under a different reading of the same subsection, it is plausible to find that subsection (3) serves only to toll the statute of limitations and nothing more. However, neither construction accurately reflects the purpose of the statute or the intent of the Legislature. It is well-established that, once the claimant has met the notice requirements of section 11-46-11(1), the claimant may file suit. The problem, however, lies within section 11-46-11(3). As written, the phrase in subsection (3) sits in direct conflict with the ninety day-notice requirement found in section 11-46-11(1). Thus, the phrase “during which time no action may be maintained by the claimant unless the claimant has received a notice of denial of claim” is unenforceable. From this day forward, section 11-46-11(3) serves only to toll the statute of limitations. To hold otherwise would work an illogical burden on the claimant. In this case, Green sent the first Notice of Claim on May 28, 2008, and the second Notice of Claim, addressed solely to DRMC, on June 23, 2008. DRMC received Green’s Notice of Claim on June 24, 2008. Green did not receive a denial of Notice of Claim from DRMC, thus Green was required to wait ninety days pursuant to section 11-46-11(1) before filing his complaint. Green filed his complaint on September 23, 2008, ninety-one days after DRMC had received notice. It is clear from the record that Green complied with section 11-46-11(1). Further, DRMC’s status as a political subdivision under section 11-46-1(i) tolled the statute of limitations for a period of 120 days after DRMC received the Notice of Claim from Green. DRMC received the Notice of Claim on June 24, 2008. Thus, the statute was tolled until October 22, 2008. Green filed the complaint against DRMC on September 23, 2008, well within the time allotted by the statute.


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