944 N.E.2d 61
Ind. Ct. App.2011Background
- O'Bryan sued Dr. Workman for allegedly failing to diagnose urinary retention that later caused kidney damage; statute at issue is two-year occurrence-based statute for health care claims.
- PET scan on February 13, 2004 suggested possible acute urinary retention or neurogenic bladder; O'Bryan was not informed and no action was taken by Workman or forwarded to other physicians during six subsequent visits.
- November 1, 2004 gallbladder surgery followed by postoperative urinary retention; O'Bryan told this was temporary and should resolve; she was instructed to catheterize and follow up with a urologist.
- Last treatment by Workman occurred January 28, 2005; thereafter no further malignant activity by him is alleged.
- Renal failure diagnosis occurred December 14, 2006; by that time O'Bryan learned of injury and possible negligence by physicians, including Workman.
- O'Bryan filed a proposed complaint December 12, 2007; trial court denied Workman's summary judgment motion; interlocutory appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Workman is entitled to summary judgment on the two-year statute of limitations | O'Bryan's discovery/trigger date was after the two-year period and continuing concealment prevented earlier filing | Under occurrence-based limits, action should have been filed within two years of the malpractice occurrence or discovery date; the claim was time-barred | Not entitled to summary judgment; genuine issues of material fact remain on reasonable-time filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. St. Vincent Hosp., Inc., 273 Ind. 374, 404 N.E.2d 585 (Ind. 1980) (occurrence-based limits constitutional; discovery rule not required)
- Martin v. Richey, 711 N.E.2d 1273 (Ind. 1999) (reaffirmed Johnson on limitations period)
- Herron v. Anigbo, 897 N.E.2d 444 (Ind. 2008) (plurality; discuss discovery/trigger in malpractice context)
- Booth v. Wiley, 839 N.E.2d 1168 (Ind. 2005) (framework: determine occurrence date, discovery/trigger, and reasonable time after discovery)
- Havens v. Ritchey, 582 N.E.2d 792 (Ind. 1991) (occurrence date for two-year period tied to last opportunity to diagnose)
- Spoljaric v. Pangan, 466 N.E.2d 37 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984) (months-long delays analyzed for reasonableness within limitations context)
- Boggs v. Tri-State Radiology, Inc., 730 N.E.2d 692 (Ind. 2000) (delay over long periods potentially unreasonable; context-specific)
- Moyer v. Three Unnamed Physicians from Marion County, 845 N.E.2d 252 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (delay over eighteen months examined for reasonableness)