Hopkins Ex Rel. Hopkins v. CLC of Biloxi, LLC
229 So. 3d 742
Miss. Ct. App.2017Background
- Sanders Hopkins Jr. sued on behalf of his father (Sanders Hopkins Sr.) after Sr. fell from a wheelchair during transport to dialysis on December 10, 2013 and died December 12, 2013 from a subdural hematoma.
- Original suit (filed March 31, 2015) named the transport company (Mobile One) and Fresenius; CLC of Biloxi (the nursing facility where Hopkins lived and which supplied the wheelchair) was not initially named.
- Sanders amended the complaint approximately eleven months later to add CLC, alleging CLC provided an improperly sized/top-heavy wheelchair that tipped and caused the injury.
- Sanders served pre-suit notice to CLC on December 17, 2015 (2 years + 5 days after the injury) and filed the second amended complaint adding CLC on February 22, 2016.
- CLC moved to dismiss as time-barred; the trial court granted dismissal with prejudice, finding the claims against CLC were barred by the two-year medical-malpractice statute of limitations and that relation-back under fictitious-party practice did not apply.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the two-year statute of limitations barred claims against CLC | Sanders: discovery rule delayed accrual because he lacked knowledge of CLC's causal role until records/depositions in 2015 | CLC: injury and potential CLC liability were known earlier; limitations expired Dec. 2015 | Court: Statute expired by Dec. 2015; claims time-barred |
| Whether adding CLC related back under fictitious-party practice (Rule 9(h)/Rule 15(c)(2)) | Sanders: he was ignorant of CLC's role and exercised diligence obtaining records; relation-back should apply | CLC: Sanders knew of CLC's existence and the records showed potential liability; plaintiff lacked due diligence | Court: Plaintiff knew CLC and its potential liability from available records; relation-back inapplicable; amendment untimely |
| Whether pre-suit notice tolled the statute of limitations | Sanders: pre-suit notice (Dec. 17, 2015) tolled or preserved claim | CLC: notice did not toll the statutory accrual date; notice was after limitations had run | Court: Notice did not save the claim; claims were already time-barred |
| Standard of review for dismissal on statute of limitations grounds | N/A | N/A | Court applied de novo review and affirmed dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Neglen v. Breazeale, 945 So.2d 988 (Miss. 2006) (discovery rule for medical-malpractice accrual requires knowledge of injury, cause, and causative relationship)
- Davenport v. Hertz Equip. Rental Corp., 187 So.3d 194 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (fictitious-party practice includes ignorance of facts giving rise to a cause of action, not just the defendant's name)
- Blailock v. Hubbs, 919 So.2d 126 (Miss. 2005) (medical records can reveal potential defendants; plaintiff must act with diligence)
- Wilner v. White, 929 So.2d 315 (Miss. 2006) (relation-back for fictitious parties requires reasonably diligent inquiry into the identity of the party)
- Doe v. Miss. Blood Servs. Inc., 704 So.2d 1016 (Miss. 1997) (same principle on diligence in fictitious-party practice)
- Anderson v. R & D Foods Inc., 913 So.2d 394 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (motion-to-dismiss on statute-of-limitations grounds reviewed de novo)