Oklahoma Supreme Court Throws Out Onerous Requirement In Medical Malpractice Cases

In a companion case to Douglas v. Cox Retirement Properties, Inc., the Oklahoma Supreme Court threw out the requirement that a plaintiff must file an expert’s affidavit at the time of filing suit for medical malpractice. The patient, Timothy Wall, filed a petition alleging medical negligence against Dr. John S. Marouk when the doctor allegedly cut the median nerve in his right arm during carpal tunnel surgery. The result of this mistake was loss of feeling in his right fingers. 12 O.S. 2011 §19 requires filing of an affidavit of merit in actions for professional negligence. The patient did not, the doctor moved for dismissal and the case was indeed dismissed.

However, the Oklahoma Supreme Court Title invalidated 12 O.S. 2011 §19, which provides that in civil actions for professional negligence, the plaintiff must attach an expert's affidavit. The Court found that §19 is unconstitutional. It violates the Okla. Const. art. 5, §46 prohibition on special laws because it created two classes of plaintiffs bringing:

  • Cases alleging professional negligence
  • Cases alleging general negligence

In finding 12 O.S. 2011 §19 unconstitutional under the Oklahoma Constitution, the Court explained what was wrong with a special law: “A special law confers some right or imposes some duty on some but not all of the class of those who stand upon the same footing and same relation to the subject of the law.”

The increased cost of bringing suit against a professional, requiring an expert affidavit at the time of filing, placed an “out of the ordinary enhanced burden” on the victims of professional misconduct.

In addition, the Court found that 12 O.S. 2011 §19 was an unconstitutional burden on access to the courts to redress injury and harm. Wall v. Marouk

Oklahoma residents deserve access to justice, using the laws and courts to secure their rights and privileges of citizenship.

Posted in Medical Malpractice

Tagged Douglas v. Cox Retirement Properties, medical malpractice, medical malpractice lawyers

Topics:  Affidavits, Expert Testimony, Filing Requirements, Medical Malpractice

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Personal Injury Updates, Professional Malpractice Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Stipe, Harper, Laizure, Uselton, Belote, Maxcey & Thetford | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »