Trial Court Not "Without Discretion" When Plaintiff Fails to File Certificate of Merit:: Hinshaw's Annual Guide to Key Illinois Medical Malpractice Litigation: 2020 Edition

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Health Care
Contact

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Health Care

Issue

Is a trial court "without discretion" to grant extension of time for obtaining certificate of merit when plaintiff fails to comply with 2-622?

Terrance Owens v. Riverside Medical Center, et al., 2020 IL App (3d) 180391

Case Summary

On September 11, 2017, plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit to which an affidavit was attached requesting a ninety (90) day extension of time to obtain a certificate of merit, which is required by 735 ILCS 5/2-622. Plaintiff filed no formal written request for a successive extension of time. On February 1, 2018, defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss for failure to obtain a certificate of merit. At the hearing, plaintiff's counsel informed the trial court about problems he had identifying the defendant doctor for service of process and that he himself had experienced "some very substantial medical problems" since filing the complaint, which resulted in him having trouble working. The statute of limitations had run, so a dismissal with prejudice would terminate the litigation. The trial court granted the Motion to Dismiss with prejudice stating, "I just don't believe I can do anything about it" and "this is not a discretionary matter." On April 9, 2018, plaintiff filed a Motion to Reconsider, which was heard on May 31, 2018. At that time, plaintiff's counsel informed the trial court that he had still not sought nor obtained an expert affidavit, but argued plaintiff's belief that the trial court had erred in determining it did not have discretion to allow additional time to comply. Nevertheless, the trial court denied the Motion to Reconsider.

On appeal, plaintiff argued that the trial court erred in concluding that it lacked discretion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice. The appellate court noted that the legislative history of 735 ILCS 5/2-622 reveals the legislature did not intend to require dismissal with prejudice, citing McCastle v. Sheinkop, 121 Ill.2d 188, 192 (Ill.Sup.Ct. 1987). In that case, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded an order of dismissal entered by a trial court which operated under the misapprehension that it did not have discretion. The appellate court further reviewed cases in which the "good cause" standard was employed to allow extensions of time to obtain the certificate of merit in instances where plaintiff had failed to comply with 2-622. The appellate court vacated the trial court's order dismissing the case with prejudice and remanded for the trial court "to exercise its discretion."

Takeaway

The trial court must not dismiss a case for failure to comply with 2-622 without first exercising its discretion.

>> Return to Hinshaw's Annual Guide to Illinois Medical Malpractice Decisions: 2020 Edition

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.

© Hinshaw & Culbertson - Health Care | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Health Care
Contact
more
less

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Health Care on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.