Arianna Blanche v. United States, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1719

Latoya Blanche received prenatal care at a federally funded Will County Community Health Center (12 visits, Feb–Aug 2008). Delivery occurred at Silver Cross Hospital in September 2008 by Dr. Husam Marsheh; infant Arianna suffered Erb’s Palsy and weighed 11.7 lbs (macrosomia).
Shortly after birth Arianna was diagnosed with Erb’s Palsy and discharged with her right arm splinted; Latoya consulted an attorney within weeks but did not retain counsel then.
Latoya retained counsel on August 10, 2009 after seeing a TV ad; counsel obtained prenatal records by Feb 2010 and delivery records by Apr 2010 but did not file suit promptly.
Arianna sued in Illinois state court on May 4, 2011; the United States removed the case and asserted FTCA jurisdiction because the Health Center and some providers were federal employees under 42 U.S.C. § 233.
Arianna presented an administrative FTCA claim to HHS on Feb 10, 2012; HHS denied it as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b). District court granted summary judgment for the United States on statute-of-limitations grounds; this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
When did claims against the delivery physician (Dr. Marsheh) accrue?	Accrual did not occur until plaintiff understood the nerve nature of Erb’s Palsy or until later investigations.	Accrual occurred shortly after birth when facts (stuck labor, splinted arm, macrosomia) put plaintiff on notice.	Accrued shortly after birth (Sept 2008); limitations expired ~Sept 2010.
When did claims against prenatal-care providers accrue?	Did not accrue until plaintiff got records or after seeing the TV ad in Aug 2009; analogous to E.Y. ex rel. Wallace.	Accrued shortly after birth because facts gave reason to suspect prenatal care (large fetus, delivery complications).	Accrued shortly after birth (Sept 2008); claims untimely when filed.
Does FTCA savings provision preserve the suit?	Savings provision applies because state suit filed within two years of accrual and administrative claim was filed within 60 days of dismissal.	Agrees savings provision may apply only if state suit was timely as to accrual date.	Savings provision inapplicable because original state suit was filed after accrual + limitations expired.
Should equitable tolling excuse delay?	Plaintiff seeks tolling due to confusion about federal status and late diagnosis understanding.	No—plaintiff and counsel were not diligent; public resources could reveal federal status; delay was not extraordinary.	Equitable tolling denied: plaintiff not diligent and no extraordinary impediment.

Arroyo v. United States, 656 F.3d 663 (7th Cir. 2011) (FTCA accrual when plaintiff knows enough to suspect a doctor-related cause or reasonable person would inquire)
E.Y. ex rel. Wallace v. United States, 758 F.3d 861 (7th Cir. 2014) (claims distinct in time/place do not automatically accrue together; prenatal and delivery claims may accrue separately)
United States v. Kubrick, 444 U.S. 111 (Sup. Ct. 1979) (medical-malpractice accrual principles for federal claims)
Arteaga v. United States, 711 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2013) (claims can accrue soon after birth if facts available and plaintiff consulted counsel/obtained records)
A.Q.C. ex rel. Castillo v. United States, 656 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2011) (accrual determined by when plaintiff had reason to suspect medical care related to injury, not by mechanical litigation events)
Santos ex rel. Beato v. United States, 559 F.3d 189 (3d Cir. 2009) (equitable tolling may apply where counsel diligently investigated and provider’s federal status was not discoverable)
Drazan v. United States, 762 F.2d 56 (7th Cir. 1985) (courts should not treat physicians’ expressions of sympathy as admissions of fault)
Threadgill v. Moore U.S.A., Inc., 269 F.3d 848 (7th Cir. 2001) (equitable tolling is reserved for extraordinary circumstances)