MacKovich v. United States, 630 F.3d 1134

Mackovich, an inmate at MCFP, filed an FTCA action in August 2008 alleging negligent medical treatment for 2004 injuries at a California federal penitentiary.
In June 2009, he amended to abandon the original claim and alleged negligent premises maintenance by MCFP employees and health care providers, leading to a slip-and-fall and inadequate treatment.
The district court dismissed the medical malpractice claim without prejudice for failure to file an affidavit from a qualified health care provider under Missouri law.
The district court dismissed the premises claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a).
Mackovich had an administrative claim filed July 29, 2008; he later provided a lengthy response (Nov. 10, 2008) detailing premises liability allegations, including a January 2, 2007 slip on a greasy floor.
The Bureau of Prisons denied the administrative claim on February 10, 2009, stating no personal injury resulted from negligent acts; the court treated this as exhaustion, and the case proceeded on the premises claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the medical malpractice claim requires an affidavit of a qualified physician.	Mackovich argues the claim is adequately stated under FTCA without the affidavit requirement.	The government contends the affidavit requirement applies and was not satisfied.	District court error; the medical claim must be dismissed without prejudice.
Whether Mackovich exhausted administrative remedies for premises liability.	Administrative claim, including premises allegations, satisfied exhaustion.	The claim did not specifically exhaust premises liability.	Premises claim properly exhausted; reversal and remand.
Whether the amended complaint relates back to the administrative claim under exhaustion rules or constitutes a new action.	Amended complaint created a new action with proper exhaustion.	Exhaustion did not apply to the amended premises claim.	Court treats amendment as continuing action with proper exhaustion; remand appropriate.

Goodman v. United States, 2 F.3d 291 (8th Cir. 1993) (FTCA state-law physician affidavit requirement applies in Missouri)
Farmers State Sav. Bank v. Farmers Home Admin., 866 F.2d 276 (8th Cir. 1989) (notice of claim satisfied by claimant's response to agency inquiry)
Duplan v. Harper, 188 F.3d 1195 (10th Cir. 1999) (exhaustion under PRAA governs when amendment occurs in new action)
Barnes v. Briley, 420 F.3d 673 (7th Cir. 2005) (exhaustion principles in amended complaints in PRAA context)