2011 WL 4543906
Supreme Court of The Virgin Is...2011Background
- Dr. Cintron performed a June 19, 2004 colonoscopy on Brady with Flores assisting.
- Brady allegedly suffered a colonic perforation requiring emergency surgery, with later aggravation of symptoms.
- Brady filed a proposed complaint May 1, 2006 with the Medical Malpractice Action Review Committee (the Committee) and a Superior Court complaint on May 5, 2006.
- Brady did not comply with the MMA pre-filing requirements until after the two-year statute of limitations lapsed.
- Superior Court granted motions to dismiss Brady’s claims against Cintron and Flores for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim against Flores.
- The Virgin Islands Medical Malpractice Act (MMA) requires filing the proposed complaint with the Committee before filing in court, and it tolls or limits actions if not complied with; the Court later analyzed whether those requirements are jurisdictional and whether alleged deficiencies could be cured by a supplemental complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the MMA pre-filing requirements jurisdictional or claims processing rules? | Brady argues the pre-filing defect is curable by supplementation. | Cintron argues the requirements are jurisdictional and non-curable. | Pre-filing requirements are jurisdictional and not curable by supplement. |
| Are medical assistants covered by the MMA as health care providers? | Flores should be covered as a health care provider. | Flores, as an unlicensed medical assistant, is not covered. | Medical assistants are not health care providers under 27 V.I.C. § 166(c). |
| Did Brady state a claim against Flores under Rule 12(b)(6) for June 19, 2004 and June 21, 2004? | Brady alleged Flores’s involvement and misdiagnosis caused injury. | Flores’s actions lacked the requisite negligent act and causation. | Dismissal affirmed for lack of plausible claims against Flores; not a viable malpractice claim under MMA for Flores. |
| Does the deceptive trade practices claim fall under the MMA? | Brady alleged joint deception for practicing without license. | Deceptive trade practices claims must involve entrepreneurial aspects, not medical malpractice. | Deceptive trade practices claim falls under MMA against Cintron; against Flores dismissed as medical malpractice recast as unfair trade practices. |
Key Cases Cited
- Berry v. Curreri, 837 F.2d 623 (3d Cir. 1988) (MMA purpose and pre-filing requirements enforce timely review)
- Abdallah v. Callender, 1 F.3d 141 (3d Cir. 1993) (pre-filing requirements are jurisdictionally mandatory)
- Ference v. Virgin Islands Family Sports & Fitness Ctr.,, 45 V.I. 345 (V.I. Super. Ct. 2004) (whether fitness center licensees extend MMA coverage; unlicensed staff not covered)
- Davis v. Omitowoju, 883 F.2d 1155 (3d Cir. 1989) (MMA objectives to preserve health care services; jurisdictional pre-filing aims)
- Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (U.S. 2006) (jurisdictional thresholds depend on statute text and framework)
- Muchnick v. Reed Elsevier, Inc., 130 S. Ct. 1237 (S. Ct. 2010) (test for whether a requirement is jurisdictional based on statute structure and history)