Professional Negligence Law Reporter

Guffey v. Lexington House, LLC, 2019 WL 2041788 (La. May 8, 2019).

The Louisiana Supreme Court held that an initial request for a medial review panel is invalid where a proper claimant under the state’s medical malpractice act did not make the request. Lexington House Nursing Home resident Geneva Guffey suffered a leg laceration while being transferred from a bath chair to her bed. She died several months later. Her granddaughter, Deana Frederick, filed a malpractice complaint against the nursing home and requested the formation of a medical review panel, identifying herself as a claimant on behalf of her deceased grandmother. Over a year after Guffey’s death, Frederick filed a supplement to her review panel request, adding two claimants— James Guffey, who was one of Geneva’s surviving sons, and herself, as the representative of Geneva’s estate.

The defendant filed an exception of no right of action under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §40:1231.8(B)(2)(a). The defense asserted that as Geneva’s granddaughter, Frederick was not a proper party claimant in that she does not belong to the class of persons entitled to file a survival action under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 2315.1 or a wrongful death suit under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 2315.2. The trial court denied the exception, and the appellate court found no error in the trial court’s finding.

James and George Guffey—another of Geneva’s surviving sons—sued the nursing home, individually and on Geneva’s behalf. The defense filed an exception of prescription, alleging that the plaintiffs’ action was timebarred in that their claims were filed more than a year after the alleged malpractice. Among other arguments, the defense asserted that Frederick’s original request for a medical review panel did not suspend prescription because she was not a party to the litigation and had no right of action resulting from Geneva’s death.

The trial court denied the exception of prescription. An intermediate appellate court found no error in the trial court’s ruling.

Reversing, the state high court noted that the prescriptive period for medical malpractice actions is one year from the alleged act or omission or within one year of the date of discovery. Under La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §40:1231.8(A)(1)(a), a party must present a proposed complaint to a medical review panel before filing suit in the district court, with the prescriptive period for filing suit suspended while a claim is pending before the review panel. Considering the statutory language, the court found that only those with a right of action to seek damages or a specified representative are qualified to be a claimant under the malpractice act. Here, the court found, when Frederick requested a medical review panel as a representative, she was not a claimant, defined as a patient or representative or any person seeking the recovery of damages. Thus, the court found, a claimant requesting a medical review panel must also be seeking damages under the statute for the patient’s injuries or death. Finding that Frederick did not have a right of action for wrongful death or survivorship damages, the court concluded that she had not been a statutory claimant at the time of the medical review panel request. The request, therefore, did not toll prescription, making the plaintiffs’ subsequent claim untimely, the court said.

Consequently, the court held that the trial court should have sustained the defendant’s exception of prescription and dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims.