Lorese Douglas Jones v. Stephen W. Behrman
W2016-00643-COA-R3-CV
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Jun 27, 2017Background
- Decedent underwent prior pelvic surgery and radiation, developed adhesions, then had a capsule endoscopy (Feb 14, 2011) that failed to pass and was associated with small-bowel obstruction symptoms.
- On Feb 20, 2011 Decedent underwent exploratory laparotomy; surgeons resected injured small-bowel tissue, used vinyl mesh for closure, and a post-op leak produced abscess, fistulas, peritonitis, sepsis; Decedent died April 21, 2011.
- Plaintiffs (family members) served pre-suit notice to the treating physicians and the State in Jan–Feb 2012 and filed suit in circuit court Aug 13, 2012 (then voluntarily dismissed and refiled under the saving statute Sept 26, 2013); State claim was handled in the Claims Commission.
- Defendants moved to dismiss / for summary judgment asserting the one-year medical-malpractice statute of limitations accrued Feb 20, 2011 (triggering a June 20, 2012 filing deadline including the 120-day toll), and Plaintiffs’ refiled suit was untimely.
- Plaintiffs countered that they did not discover the cause of action until Feb 6, 2012 (when they obtained records), asserted fraudulent concealment, and alternatively argued a certificate of good faith delayed the limitations deadline.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Defendants, finding accrual on Feb 20, 2011, no adequate proof of fraudulent concealment, and rejecting the certificate-of-good-faith toll argument; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statute of limitations tolled by discovery rule or fraudulent concealment | Plaintiffs: did not (and could not reasonably) discover claim until Feb 6, 2012; Defendants concealed material facts | Defendants: Plaintiffs knew or reasonably should have known by Feb 20, 2011; no concealment | Court: accrual Feb 20, 2011; Plaintiffs failed to prove fraudulent concealment; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether pre-suit certificate of good faith delays accrual or tolls limitations | Plaintiffs: diligent procurement of certificate extends limitations until one year after signing | Defendants/State: certificate does not determine accrual or discovery date | Court: rejected plaintiff’s certificate-of-good-faith toll theory as contrary to statute and precedent |
| Whether Plaintiffs gave adequate pre-suit notice to trigger 120-day extension | Plaintiffs: served pre-suit notices in Jan–Feb 2012 | Defendants: contended other technical defects but primary timeliness issue controls | Court: pre-suit notice did occur but 120-day extension still produced June 20, 2012 deadline; initial suit filed after that date |
| Whether summary judgment was proper under Rule 56 standard | Plaintiffs: genuine factual disputes exist (discovery date, concealment) | Defendants: affidavits show family was informed of obstruction and bowel resection; no material fact dispute | Court: applied de novo review and concluded no genuine issue of material fact; summary judgment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Rye v. Women’s Care Center of Memphis, MPLLC, 477 S.W.3d 235 (Tenn. 2015) (summary-judgment burden and standards in health-care-liability contexts)
- Robinson v. Baptist Memorial Hospital, 464 S.W.3d 599 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014) (plaintiff bears burden to prove fraudulent concealment to avoid statute of limitations)
- Benton v. Snyder, 825 S.W.2d 409 (Tenn. 1992) (elements required to establish fraudulent concealment)
- Martin v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., 271 S.W.3d 76 (Tenn. 2008) (summary judgment: view evidence in light most favorable to nonmoving party)
- Hannan v. Alltel Publishing Co., 270 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2008) (procedural standards for summary judgment)