263 P.3d 328
Okla. Civ. App.2011Background
- Plaintiff Michael Anderson filed a medical malpractice action on Feb. 28, 2007 against Access Medical Centers and three physicians.
- Defendants moved to compel discovery after Plaintiff did not respond; court ordered Plaintiff to respond and warned dismissal without prejudice for continued failure.
- On May 15, 2008, the court dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to cooperate in discovery.
- In Oct. 2009, Attorneys informed Plaintiff of improved health and proposed winding up the case, and Oct. 22, 2009 they stated they had filed a dismissal without prejudice with Plaintiff’s authorization.
- December 2009 Plaintiff retained new counsel for a potential legal malpractice claim against Attorneys; January 2010, Plaintiff notified insurer of the history and claimed legal negligence.
- On March 11, 2010 Attorneys filed a motion to vacate the May 15, 2008 dismissal arguing an irregularity under 12 O.S.2001 § 1031(3); Defendants argued Attorneys lacked standing and authorization; trial court overruled the motion on Apr. 14, 2010; Attorneys appeal for standing.
- (Note: The opinion ultimately dismisses the appeal for lack of standing.)
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do Attorneys have standing to appeal independently of Plaintiff? | Attorneys rely on Crawford exception and attorney lien. | Attorneys are not parties and have no authorized standing to appeal. | No; Attorneys lack standing to appeal. |
| Did Attorneys have standing to file a motion to vacate without Plaintiff’s consent? | Plaintiff authorized dismissal and Attorneys acted on Plaintiff’s behalf. | Without Plaintiff's authorization, improper to file to vacate. | Unnecessary to decide due to lack of standing to appeal. |
| Are there grounds under 12 O.S.2001 §§ 1031 and 1038 to vacate the May 15, 2008 order? | Irregularities in memorialization create grounds to vacate. | No sufficient irregularity given knowledge of proceedings by Attorneys. | Court addressed standing first; vacatur grounds not reached. |
Key Cases Cited
- Crawford v. Gipson, 642 P.2d 248 (Okla. 1982) (exception to the rule that only parties may set aside judgments; indemnitor-like standing considered in narrow circumstances)
- Cities Serv. Co. v. Gulf Oil Corp., 976 P.2d 545 (Okla. 1999) (standing requires a legally protectable injury and direct nexus)
- Toxic Waste Impact Grp., Inc. v. Leavitt, 890 P.2d 906 (Okla. 1994) (three standing elements; injury-in-fact, causation, redressability)
- Towne v. Hubbard, 977 P.2d 1084 (Okla. 1999) (counsel’s standing may arise in certain orders against counsel)
- Vickers v. Boyd, 836 P.2d 1269 (Okla. 1992) (sanctions against attorney can confer standing in narrow contexts)