Skaggs v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr.
2021 Ohio 2405
| Ohio Ct. Cl. | 2021Background
- Plaintiff, an inmate with a long-standing seizure disorder treated with Topamax and Keppra before incarceration, was transferred to London Correctional Institution in January 2016.
- In February 2016 defendant’s medical staff discontinued Topamax (Feb. 5) and Keppra (Feb. 9) and plaintiff was weaned off those medications over the following months.
- After the medication changes plaintiff experienced frequent, witnessed seizures and several incidents in 2016 where force was used on him while seizing; he alleges wrist injury from overly tight handcuffs and other harms.
- Plaintiff filed suit on May 23, 2019 seeking damages for the use of force and for the change in prescription regimen.
- Defendant moved to dismiss/reject claims as time-barred; at trial the magistrate found the force claims accrued in 2016 and the medical claims likewise accrued then; magistrate also found plaintiff presented no medical expert to establish malpractice.
- Magistrate recommended judgment for defendant: force claims barred by the applicable statute(s) of limitations; medical-malpractice claims time-barred and, alternatively, unsupported for lack of expert proof of standard of care, breach, and proximate causation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of claims for force used during 2016 seizure incidents | Skaggs contends force during 2016 seizures caused injury (wrist damage) and entitles him to damages | State contends claims accrued in 2016 and plaintiff’s May 2019 filing is beyond the applicable limitations (two years under R.C. 2743.16) | Force-related claims are time-barred and cannot be recovered |
| Medical malpractice claim for altering seizure medication (Feb. 2016) | Skaggs argues removing/altering Topamax/Keppra precipitated increased seizures and injury | State contends malpractice claims are time-barred (statutory accrual rules) and, even if timely, plaintiff failed to present expert testimony to prove standard of care, breach, and proximate cause | Medical-malpractice claim is time-barred; alternatively fails on the merits for lack of required expert proof |
Key Cases Cited
- Frysinger v. Leech, 32 Ohio St.3d 38 (1987) (accrual rule for medical-malpractice claims: discovery or termination of physician-patient relationship)
- Allenius v. Thomas, 42 Ohio St.3d 131 (1989) (defines "cognizable event" that triggers a plaintiff's duty to investigate malpractice)
- Bruni v. Tatsumi, 46 Ohio St.2d 127 (1976) (standard for proving medical malpractice: deviation from practice acceptable to physicians of ordinary skill, care, diligence)
- Schmidt v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med. Ctr., 117 Ohio App.3d 427 (1997) (applies Bruni standard to malpractice claims)
- Reeves v. Healy, 192 Ohio App.3d 769 (2011) (expert testimony required to establish standard of care and breach in malpractice actions)
- Bugh v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 128 N.E.3d 906 (2019) (general rule that a cause of action accrues when the wrongful action is committed)