Joshlin Renee Woodruff by and through Dorothy Cockrell v. Armie Walker, M.D.
542 S.W.3d 486
| Tenn. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Mother (Joshlin Woodruff) experienced respiratory/cardiac arrest during labor on June 21, 2012; an emergency C-section resulted in severe, permanent brain injuries to Mother and Child (Braylon).
- Mother had myasthenia gravis and prior prenatal/hospital treatment (including May 31–June 6, 2012) involving Dr. Hoeldtke and others; Child was placed in temporary custody and Mother later had a conservator appointed.
- Plaintiffs sent pre-suit notices with HIPAA-style authorizations on April 17, 2015 (authorizations limited to records for Jan 24, 2012; June 21, 2012; July 16, 2012).
- Plaintiffs filed the health-care-liability complaint on Sept 29, 2015; defendants moved to dismiss asserting (1) one-year statute of limitations (Tenn. Code Ann. §29-26-116(a)(1)) barred Mother’s claims and (2) three-year statute of repose (§29-26-116(a)(3)) barred all claims because pre-suit notice/authorizations were deficient.
- Trial court dismissed all claims; on appeal the court affirmed dismissal of Mother’s claims (statute of limitations) but reversed dismissal of Child’s claims (statute of repose) because Child could not authorize release of Mother’s prenatal/hospitalization records and defendants identified no other deficiency in Child’s authorizations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mother’s claims were time-barred under the 1-year medical-liability statute | Discovery rule delayed accrual until March 2015 (Walker deposition); or tolling under Tenn. Code Ann. §28-1-106 because Mother was incompetent | Claims accrued June 21, 2012; §28-1-106 requires an adjudication of incompetence before accrual to toll | Affirmed: accrual was June 21, 2012; discovery rule not triggered; §28-1-106 did not toll because adjudication (conservatorship) occurred after accrual |
| Whether Plaintiffs’ pre-suit notice/medical authorizations extended the 3-year statute of repose for Child by 120 days (§29-26-121(c)) | Authorizations covering June 21, 2012 were sufficient because wrongful conduct occurred that day | Authorizations were deficient because they omitted prenatal/May–June hospitalization records relevant to claims | Reversed as to Child: Child’s authorizations were sufficient — he could not release Mother’s separate records, and defendants showed no other prejudice or deficiency; repose period extended and Child’s suit timely |
| Whether trial court abused discretion by not ruling on motion to amend complaint | Amendment alleged discovery in March 2015 (Walker depo) — would affect accrual | Amendment offered after delay; trial court implicitly considered allegations when deciding dismissal | No reversible error: trial court considered the factual claim and amendment would not change outcome; denial (explicit or implicit) was not disturbed |
Key Cases Cited
- Webb v. Nashville Area Habitat for Humanity, Inc., 346 S.W.3d 422 (Tenn. 2011) (Rule 12.02(6) standard: tests legal sufficiency of complaint)
- Myers v. AMISUB (SFH), Inc., 382 S.W.3d 300 (Tenn. 2012) (de novo review and distinction between Rule 12.02 and summary judgment where outside materials considered)
- Sherrill v. Souder, 325 S.W.3d 584 (Tenn. 2010) (discovery rule for health-care-liability actions: accrual when reasonable person alert to need to investigate)
- Redwing v. Catholic Bishop for Diocese of Memphis, 363 S.W.3d 436 (Tenn. 2012) (elements for analyzing statute of limitations: period, accrual, tolling)
- Calaway ex rel. Calaway v. Schucker, 193 S.W.3d 509 (Tenn. 2005) (three-year statute of repose in medical-malpractice context; §28-1-106 does not toll repose)
- Stevens v. Hickman Cmty. Health Care Servs., Inc., 418 S.W.3d 547 (Tenn. 2013) (pre-suit HIPAA-compliant authorization must substantially comply; analyze extent of error and prejudice; "complete medical records" means records relevant to claim)