A.Q.C. Ex Rel. Castillo v. United States
656 F.3d 135
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- FTCA medical malpractice action against United States and Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center for birth-injury to A.Q.C. by mother Paquita Castillo, her natural guardian.
- Injury identified as Erb's palsy affecting left arm and leg; plaintiff sought administrative claim preconditions under FTCA § 2401(b).
- Counselor in December 2005 suggested possible medical malpractice and advised consulting an attorney; Castillo consulted Fitzgerald & Fitzgerald in February 2006 and retained them in April 2006.
- Firm delayed presenting the claim to DHHS until April 7, 2008, after determining federal status, rendering the administrative filing untimely by 2–4 months.
- District court held accrual occurred in December 2005 under the diligence-discovery rule; it rejected equitable tolling and dismissed as untimely.
- Appeals court affirmed, holding accrual no later than February 2006 and equitable tolling unavailable given lack of diligence by counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accrual date under diligence-discovery rule | Castillo, on behalf of A.Q.C., argues accrual occurred later, when records reviewed in 2006 | Government contends accrual occurred when Castillo had reason to suspect iatrogenic injury, by 2005 | Accrual no later than February 2006 under diligence-discovery rule |
| Equitable tolling applicability | Equitable tolling should save untimely claim | No extraordinary circumstances; counsel dilatory conduct defeats tolling | Equitable tolling not available; timely filing required despite tolling theory |
Key Cases Cited
- Kronisch v. United States, 150 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 1998) (FTCA accrual under diligence-discovery rule; awareness of injury and cause to trigger tolling)
- Valdez ex rel. Donely v. United States, 518 F.3d 173 (2d Cir. 2008) (recognizes diligence-discovery accrual and awareness of potential iatrogenic cause)
- Kubrick v. United States, 444 U.S. 111 (Suprep. 1979) (accrual when plaintiff knows enough to protect by seeking legal advice)
- Barrett v. United States, 689 F.2d 324 (2d Cir. 1982) (accrual generally at time of injury; supports discovery rule exceptions)
- Syms v. Olin Corp., 408 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2005) (determines accrual under FTCA; diligence-discovery rule context)