Paul M. Lang and Allison M. Boyer v. Dr. Patrick Goldsworthy, 2015 Mo. LEXIS 197

Background

Plaintiffs (family members) sued chiropractors for wrongful death alleging negligent care caused decedent's death.
In the first suit Plaintiffs timely filed a health-care affidavit under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 538.225 and litigated for ~2.5 years, then voluntarily dismissed.
Plaintiffs refiled an identical petition within the time they believed saved by the nonsuit statute but did not attach or refile the previously-obtained affidavit.
Defendants moved to dismiss the second action for failure to file the § 538.225 affidavit; the trial court dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiffs did not file the affidavit within the 180-day period.
Because of the passage of time and the three-year wrongful-death limitations period plus the timing of the nonsuit, Plaintiffs could not pursue a third suit; they argued § 538.225 is unconstitutional (open courts, jury-trial, special-law/federal jury right).
The court affirmed dismissal without reaching the constitutional challenges, holding Plaintiffs’ failure to refile the affidavit (which they already possessed) warranted dismissal under the statute.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 538.225's affidavit requirement and mandatory dismissal violate Missouri's open courts clause (Art. I, § 14) and right to jury trial	§ 538.225 arbitrarily bars access to courts and the right to jury trial because dismissal effectively prevented meritorious claims from proceeding	Statute validly prescribes procedural filing requirements; Plaintiffs failed to comply and dismissal is mandated; no constitutional defect need be reached	Court avoided deciding constitutionality; affirmed dismissal for failure to file affidavit on procedural ground
Whether prior filing of a compliant affidavit in a dismissed first suit excuses refiling the affidavit in a second, identical suit	Prior-filed affidavit/earlier court rulings (denial of summary judgment) show merit and should prevent dismissal in the second suit	Statute requires an affidavit in every medical-negligence action; prior affidavit does not carry forward to a new filing	Held: prior affidavit does not excuse refiling; plaintiffs must file affidavit in each action
Whether dismissal without prejudice under § 538.225 deprived Plaintiffs of ability to refile and thus violated rights	Dismissal effectively barred claim because statutory limitations and timing made refiling impossible	Dismissal was without prejudice as statute requires; any inability to refile resulted from Plaintiffs’ timing and the limitations statute, not § 538.225 itself	Held: dismissal was proper; inability to refile was due to statute of limitations/savings-period timing, not § 538.225’s unconstitutionality
Whether court should reach constitutional challenges when case can be resolved on statutory noncompliance	Plaintiffs urged constitutional review	Defendants argued dismissal under clear statutory mandate obviated need to decide constitutionality	Held: court resolved case on statutory compliance and avoided constitutional ruling where unnecessary

Key Cases Cited

Lynch v. Lynch, 260 S.W.3d 834 (Mo. banc 2008) (standard of review for dismissal de novo)
In re Estate of Austin, 389 S.W.3d 168 (Mo. banc 2013) (appellate review limited to grounds raised in motion to dismiss)
State ex rel. SLAH, L.L.C. v. City of Woodson Terrace, 378 S.W.3d 357 (Mo. banc 2012) (avoid deciding constitutional questions when case can be resolved otherwise)
Mayes v. St. Luke’s Hosp. of Kansas City, 430 S.W.3d 260 (Mo. banc 2014) (§ 538.225 requires filing an affidavit in every medical-negligence action; mandatory dismissal if not filed)
Mahoney v. Doerhoff Surgical Serv’s., Inc., 807 S.W.2d 503 (Mo. banc 1991) (prior decision upholding former discretionary version of § 538.225)
Kilmer v. Mun, 17 S.W.3d 545 (Mo. banc 2000) (elements for an open courts clause violation)