Conkin v. CHS-Ohio Valley, Inc.
2012 Ohio 2816
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Zelma Anderson, a 70-year-old nursing home resident, was moved from a wheelchair into a Hoyer lift and allegedly injured during the transfer.
- Conkin, as Anderson's guardian, sued Glencare and an unnamed employee eighteen months after the incident, asserting negligence and related theories.
- Glencare and the employee moved to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) as time-barred medical claims under R.C. 2305.113.
- The trial court granted the dismissal; Conkin appealed, arguing the claims do not constitute medical claims and thus are not subject to a one-year statute.
- The court reviews de novo and accepts the complaint's allegations as true, determining whether the claims are medical claims under the statute.
- The court ultimately held the pleaded claims are not medical claims, reversing and remanding for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are Conkin's claims medical claims under RC 2305.113? | Conkin asserts the transfer injuries were not part of medical care or treatment. | Glencare contends the claims arise from medical care and thus are medical claims | Not medical claims; not barred by one-year limit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Browning v. Burt, 66 Ohio St.3d 544 (1993) (defines 'care' as prevention/alleviation of a defect or illness and not to be broadly construed)
- Rome v. Flower Mem. Hosp., 70 Ohio St.3d 14 (1994) (use of medical equipment can be 'care' if ancillary to a medical procedure or treatment)
- Hill v. Wadsworth-Rittman Area Hosp., 185 Ohio App.3d 788 (2009) (no medical claim where injury during discharge from hospital not tied to treatment)
- Balascoe v. St. Elizabeth Hosp. Med. Ctr., 110 Ohio App.3d 83 (1996) (no medical claim where injury not arising from medical care or treatment)