Reginald Young v. United States, 942 F.3d 349

Illinois law (735 ILCS 5/2-622) requires a plaintiff in a medical-malpractice suit to file an affidavit and a physician’s report stating there is a “reasonable and meritorious cause,” with the physician attesting that he reviewed the plaintiff’s records and explaining the basis for that conclusion.
Under the FTCA, the United States is liable "to the same extent as a private person," so substantive state conditions on malpractice suits can apply to FTCA actions in federal court.
Reginald Young, a federal prisoner, sued the United States for alleged malpractice for failing to perform cataract surgery; some prison doctors recommended surgery, others did not.
Young did not file the required §5/2-622 affidavit or physician report, and he argued that the recorded recommendations from two doctors were sufficient.
The United States moved to dismiss or for summary judgment; the district court granted relief (citing absence of a §5/2-622 report showing review of records and a statement of a meritorious cause).
The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding that the state statute is substantive (so it applies under the FTCA) but that federal procedural rules govern timing and enforcement (i.e., lack of the affidavit/report does not require dismissal at the pleading stage); Young’s medical records were nevertheless insufficient to satisfy §5/2-622.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Applicability of §5/2-622 to FTCA suits	§5/2-622 shouldn’t bar the FTCA claim; Young argued his records suffice	§5/2-622 is a substantive condition that applies to suits against the U.S.	§5/2-622 is substantive and applies under §1346(b)(1) (state substantive rules bind FTCA suits)
Procedural consequence of missing affidavit/report at pleading stage	Complaint should stand without the §5/2-622 attachments; recommendations suffice	Federal defendant may seek dismissal or summary judgment for lack of the required report	Federal pleading rules control; a complaint cannot be dismissed under Rule 12 merely for lacking §5/2-622 attachments; timing governed by federal procedure
Proper timing/enforcement of §5/2-622 requirements	Plaintiff need not have the formal §5/2-622 report attached at filing; recommendations are adequate	State allows limited delay, but federal rules determine answer and summary-judgment timing	State allows exceptions, but federal Rule 8/12/56 govern timing; defendant can seek early summary judgment and court may allow time under Rule 56(d)
Sufficiency of Young’s submitted medical records	Two doctors’ recommendations for surgery establish reasonable and meritorious cause	Records do not show a reviewing physician attested to having reviewed all records or explained why claim is meritorious	Records were insufficient under §5/2-622; judgment for the United States affirmed

Hahn v. Walsh, 762 F.3d 617 (7th Cir. 2014) (state affidavit/report requirement applies in federal malpractice suits)
Gipson v. United States, 631 F.3d 448 (7th Cir. 2011) (state expert-report statute applied under the FTCA)
Cooke v. Jackson Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 919 F.3d 1024 (7th Cir. 2019) (federal rules govern procedural requirements in federal suits)
Shady Grove Orthopedic Assocs. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010) (federal procedural rules apply despite conflicting state rules)
Burlington N. R.R. v. Woods, 480 U.S. 1 (1987) (federal courts apply federal procedural rules)
Walker v. Armco Steel Corp., 446 U.S. 740 (1980) (federal procedural authority can supersede state procedures)
Mayer v. Gary Partners & Co., 29 F.3d 330 (7th Cir. 1994) (applying federal procedural rule-preemption principles)