Amy K. Metz, as Mother and Next Friend of Kiara K. Metz, an incapacitated minor v. Saint Joseph Regional Medical Center-Plymouth Campus, Inc. (mem. dec.), 115 N.E.3d 489

In 2017 Amy Metz sued Saint Joseph Regional Medical Center (Plymouth), Saint Joseph Regional Medical Center, Inc., Dr. Joel Schumacher, and Plymouth Family & Internal Medicine, alleging negligence and seeking punitive damages on behalf of her daughter Kiara (born 2004).
Newborn screening showed a “borderline abnormal” TSH on August 16, 2004 and requested a repeat specimen; the IU Newborn Screening Laboratory sent results to Plymouth Hospital and Dr. Schumacher.
Metz alleges Medical Providers failed to notify her, failed to obtain the requested repeat test, and that office staff incorrectly told her the results were normal when she called on August 20, 2004.
Kiara was not diagnosed with hypothyroidism until later in September 2004 by a pediatrician who requested records and re-testing; Metz alleges irreversible developmental injury as a result.
Medical Providers moved to dismiss under T.R. 12(B)(1) and 12(B)(6), arguing the claims are governed by the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act (MMA), which Metz did not satisfy; the trial court granted dismissal.
On appeal the key legal question was whether Metz’s allegations sound in ordinary negligence or are governed by the MMA (i.e., whether the claims require application of medical standards of care and thus the MMA’s pre-suit and statute-of-limitations rules).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act (MMA) governs Metz’s claims	Metz: the failures were purely administrative/clerical (failure to read/report lab results; miscommunication by staff), so claims are ordinary negligence outside the MMA	Medical Providers: the conduct (interpretation, follow-up, and communication of a borderline abnormal newborn TSH) arises from provider duties during medical care and implicates medical judgment, so MMA applies	Held: MMA applies; the alleged failures relate to patient care and professional expertise (court affirmed dismissal for lack of MMA pre-suit compliance and statute-of-limitations)

Robertson v. Anonymous Clinic, 63 N.E.3d 349 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (framework focusing on whether claim concerns provider behavior while acting in professional capacity)
Terry v. Cmty. Health Network, 17 N.E.3d 389 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (distinguishes ordinary negligence from malpractice by whether medical standard of care is needed)
Preferred Prof’l Ins. Co. v. West, 23 N.E.3d 716 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (administrative tasks may fall outside the MMA; analysis of message-slip and communication claims)
Howard Reg’l Health Sys. v. Gordon, 952 N.E.2d 182 (Ind. 2011) (MMA covers conduct related to promotion of patient health or exercise of professional judgment)
Bader v. Johnson, 732 N.E.2d 1212 (Ind. 2000) (failure to provide test results discussed in context of breach analysis under MMA)