Regan v. South Cent. Reg'l Med. Ctr.


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CA-00268-SCT
Linked Case(s): 2009-CA-00268-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 08-05-2010
Opinion Author: Pierce, J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Medical malpractice - Relief from judgment - M.R.C.P. 60(b)(4), (5) & (6)
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson, P.J., Randolph, Kitchens and Chandler, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Graves, P.J.
Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Dickinson, J., Concurs in Part and in Result With Separate Written Opinion
Concur in Part, Concur in Result Joined By 1: Lamar, J.
Procedural History: Motion to Set Aside the Trial Court's Order
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 12-15-2008
Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court
Judge: Billy Joe Landrum
Disposition: The trial court granted the Hospital’s Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed the suit on November 27, 2007, due to Regan’s failure to attach a certificate of expert consultation with her complaint. The trial court’s decision was based on this Court’s decision in Walker v. Whitfield Nursing Center, Inc., 931 So. 2d 583 (Miss. 2006). Less than one year after the trial court’s decision, this Court overturned Walker in Wimley v. Reid, 991 So. 2d 135 (Miss. 2008). On October 1, 2008, Regan filed a motion under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 60(b) to set aside the trial court’s order on October 1, 2008. It was denied.
Case Number: 2005-48-CV3

Note: The Mississippi Supreme Court later withdrew this opinion and submitted a new opinion on 10/28/2010. View the substituted opinion at: http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO63854.pdf

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Shelia Regan




NORMAN WILLIAM PAULI, JR.



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief
  • Appellant #1 Reply Brief

  • Appellee: South Central Regional Medical Center RICHARD O. BURSON, PEELER GRAYSON LACEY, 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 - Relief from judgment - M.R.C.P. 60(b)(4), (5) & (6)

    Summary of the Facts: Shelia Regan filed suit against South Central Regional Medical Center on or about March 10, 2005. She failed to attach a certificate of expert consultation to the complaint as required by section 11-1-58. The Hospital filed a Motion to Dismiss. Regan subsequently filed the Certificate of Consultation on July 21, 2005. The trial court denied the Hospital’s Motion to Dismiss. After the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Walker v. Whitfield Nursing Center, Inc., 931 So. 2d 583 (Miss. 2006), the Hospital filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. Regan filed a Motion For Leave to File Amended Complaint. The court denied Regan’s motion and granted the Hospital’s motion. The following day, Regan filed a second complaint which was substantially similar to her earlier complaint but included a certificate of expert consultation. The Hospital filed a motion to dismiss. Regan voluntarily dismissed her complaint but then immediately filed a third complaint against the Hospital. The Hospital filed a motion to dismiss which the court granted. Regan appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Regan argues that the trial court erred in failing to grant her relief under M.R.C.P. 60(b)(4). The first time Regan argued based on Rule 60(b)(4) was in her appellate brief. The trial court was never afforded the opportunity to hear these issues nor to make a ruling concerning subsection (4). Therefore, this issue is not properly before the Court. Although Regan never specifically argued M.R.C.P. 60(b)(5) in her Rule 60(b) Motion, she did argue that, because Wimley v. Reid, 991 So. 2d 135 (Miss. 2008) overruled Walker, the trial court should enter an order amending or setting aside its prior Order Granting Summary Judgment and Judgment of Dismissal. While 60(b)(5) authorizes relief when a judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, it does not authorize relief from a judgment on the ground that the law applied by the court in making its adjudication has been subsequently overruled or declared erroneous in another and unrelated proceeding. Thus, Rule 60(b)(5) is not a mechanism by which Regan can be granted relief. Regan argues that relief is justified through Rule 60(b)(6)’s catch-all provision. For a party to be granted relief under Rule 60(b)(6), he must demonstrate extraordinary circumstances which prevented or rendered him unable to prosecute his case. Further, the party must demonstrate both injury and circumstances beyond his control that prevented him from proceeding with the prosecution or defense of the action in a proper fashion. A change in decision law after entry of judgment does not constitute exceptional circumstances and is not alone grounds for relief from a final judgment. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Regan’s Rule 60(b)(6) Motion to Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment and Judgment of Dismissal.


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