Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ann L. Miller and Richard A. Miller v. Glenn L. Dobbs, D.O., and Partners in Health

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided September 13, 2012No. 15A05-1108-CT-431Published

1DissentVaidik, Judge

I respectfully dissent from both Judge Kirsch’s and Judge Brown’s interpretations of the Medical Malpractice Act. I believe that the statute is clear and that a proposed medical malpractice complaint is not considered filed until the filing and processing fees are paid. Our Supreme Court precedent also requires such a result. Because the Millers’ filing and processing fees were paid after the statute of limitation expired, I would affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants.

Our Supreme Court has created several bright lines in the law. Statutes of limitation…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Boostrom v. BachIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Comer v. GohilIndiana Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Melanie Webster v. Walgreen Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API