Ruling by Wyoming Supreme Court Reinforces Need to Follow Required Procedures in Malpractice Lawsuits

It often seems unfair, but a case involving deadly medical mistakes can hinge on a seemingly minor procedural requirement. Failing to take a routine procedural step in a case can prevent that case from succeeding. That missed procedural step may not be noticed until it is too late to correct the error.

In a recent decision by the Wyoming Supreme Court, the Court reversed an earlier ruling and closed a loophole that could have allowed some medical malpractice victims to file a claim after withdrawing their initial claim. This case highlights the need to ensure that every procedural step is correct in a medical malpractice case. It also demonstrates the importance of working with a legal team prepared to act effectively within the timeframes established by the law. Choosing the wrong attorney or waiting too long to talk to an attorney can destroy any chance of gaining justice and compensation for your losses.

What the Case Involved

The recent case, Ellis V. Hiser, was brought by a woman whose father had passed away. She alleged medical malpractice against the physician who treated him. Wyoming law requires plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases to follow specific procedures, and courts are strict about dismissing cases when those procedures are not followed. The procedures sometimes seem formal and pointless, but they were established to protect the rights of those involved with the case.

In this case, the plaintiff, Dianna Ellis, filed her complaint within the statute of limitations, but she failed to provide proper notice of the lawsuit to the doctor. This would be grounds for dismissing the case, so she later voluntarily dismissed her lawsuit. Months later, she refiled the lawsuit, claiming that Wyoming’s “savings statute” granted her an extra year of filing time. This time, she properly served the lawsuit notice, but the doctor asked the court to dismiss the case on the grounds that the savings statute did not apply. The court granted the doctor’s motion, but the daughter appealed.

What the Court Said

The savings statute, a somewhat unique facet of Wyoming law codified in Section 1-3-118 of the Wyoming statutes, provides that if an action “fails otherwise than upon the merits,” the plaintiff is allowed an additional year to file a new action. This applies in situations where the case was filed within the statute of limitations, but the statute had expired by the time the action was filed. This particular case hinged on the word “failed.” The court discussed whether a voluntary dismissal counted as a failed case. In a case decided in 2022, the Wyoming Supreme Court held that a voluntary dismissal qualified as a failure based on a factor other than the merits of the case and, therefore, the savings statute would apply.

The Wyoming Supreme Court in this case overruled that decision. Writing for the Court, Justice Fox said that allowing the plaintiff the extra year to file would be “abuse” of the rules and that, therefore, it should not follow the earlier interpretation. In fact, Justice Fox said that the earlier case was “wrongly decided” because the word “fail” does not encompass voluntary dismissals.

What This Means

This case was a split decision with a vigorous dissent, and it overturned a recent case. Clearly, some legal authorities believe that a plaintiff should receive extra time to file if they voluntarily dismiss their original case. But if the plaintiff had been working with the right attorneys from the start of the case, it might never have gone down to the wire, requiring the use of a loophole to save the case.

Rules change, and there is some disagreement about the service of process in this case. But the case could have been dismissed and refiled within the original statute of limitations, avoiding all this concern. To succeed in a lawsuit, particularly one as complex as a medical malpractice case, plaintiffs need to consult attorneys experienced in malpractice litigation as early as possible. An experienced attorney will understand how to comply with all the necessary requirements, and getting an early start on the case avoids the risk of missing deadlines and needing extensions.

Talk to Ragain & Clark If You Suspect Injuries Were Caused by Medical Mistakes

It often takes extensive investigation to determine whether an injury was caused by an error that could have been prevented and that represented actionable malpractice. This requires time. So if you believe that birth injuries or other injuries were caused by a doctor or hospital’s failure to follow appropriate medical standards, it is a good idea to consult a medical malpractice attorney sooner rather than later.

To schedule a free consultation with the team at Ragain & Clark, call us at 307-388-6400 or contact us online today.