From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Braden v. Yoder

Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Eastern Section
Jan 21, 1980
592 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1980)

Summary

holding tolling provision modifies application of limitation provision

Summary of this case from Hatfield v. Bishop Clarkson Memorial Hosp

Opinion

May 25, 1979. Certiorari Denied by Supreme Court January 21, 1980.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Knox County, James M. Haynes, J., reversed and remanded.

Sidney W. Gilreath, Robert E. Pryor, Jack W. Bowers and Robert B. Williamson, Knoxville, for appellant.

Norman H. Williams, Knoxville, for Dr. James W. Yoder.

Jonathan H. Burnett, Knoxville, for Dr. John H. Bell.

Donald B. Oakley, Morristown, for Dr. William Gutch.


OPINION

This is a medical malpractice action involving the application of the maximum three-year limitation period codified at T.C.A. 23-3415(a).

The plaintiff-appellant was a minor when, on June 10, 1964, the allegedly negligent treatment of his broken arm occurred. This suit was filed on August 12, 1975, approximately two weeks prior to the plaintiff's nineteenth birthday. Under the legal disability statute, T.C.A. 28-107, a minor may bring suit "within the time of limitation for the particular cause of action" after reaching majority. A three-year maximum period, not applicable to this suit, is also established therein.

On May 29, 1975, the state legislature passed the Medical Malpractice Review Board and Claim Act of 1975 [T.C.A. 23-3401 et seq.], and on July 1, 1975, the Act became effective. Reacting to the so-called "medical malpractice crisis" created in part by the relaxing of the tort statute of limitation under the discovery doctrine adopted in Teeters v. Currey, 518 S.W.2d 512 (Tenn. 1974), the legislature superimposed upon the existing limitation period codified at T.C.A. 28-304, a maximum three-year ceiling. This three-year ceiling is unrelated to the accrual of a cause of action commencing not on discovery but rather at the date of the allegedly negligent act.

Therefore, if T.C.A. 23-3415(a) is applicable to this case, the plaintiff's cause of action would have been barred on June 10, 1967, or approximately eight years before the effective date of the malpractice act. We hold that T.C.A. 23-3415(a) is not applicable to this suit and that the suit was timely filed.

In Parlato v. Howe, U.S. District Court, Knoxville, filed April 20, 1979, and designated for publication, Judge Taylor held that T.C.A. 23-3415(a) did not eliminate the special rights of minors under T.C.A. 28-107. We agree completely. There is no legislative intent that such rights be eliminated and to do so would cause harsh results to parties injured at an early age who are helpless to protect their rights.

For the reasons above, we hold that this suit is not barred by the maximum limitation period of T.C.A. 23-3415(a).

The order dismissing the action is reversed and the cause remanded for trial. The costs of this appeal are taxed to the appellant.

GODDARD and FRANKS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Braden v. Yoder

Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Eastern Section
Jan 21, 1980
592 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1980)

holding tolling provision modifies application of limitation provision

Summary of this case from Hatfield v. Bishop Clarkson Memorial Hosp

holding that the three-year statute of repose did not bar a minor's right to bring suit after reaching the age of majority

Summary of this case from Bentley v. Wellmont Health Sys.

following Parlato v. Howe, supra, in holding that the medical malpractice cap did not apply to existing rights of action of minors or affect the applicability of the minors' savings statute

Summary of this case from Tate v. Eli Lilly & Co.

In Braden v. Yoder, 592 S.W.2d 896, 897 (Tenn. App. 1979), the court held that section 29-26-116(a) did not eliminate the special rights of minors under section 28-1-106 because "[t]here is no legislative intent that such rights be eliminated and to do so would cause harsh results to parties injured at an early age who are helpless to protect their rights."

Summary of this case from Bowers by Bowers v. Hammond
Case details for

Braden v. Yoder

Case Details

Full title:Roy C. BRADEN, Jr., Appellant, v. Dr. James W. YODER, Appellee, v. Dr…

Court:Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Eastern Section

Date published: Jan 21, 1980

Citations

592 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1980)

Citing Cases

Crespo v. McCullough

Id. at 998-99 (footnote omitted). Approximately one month later, the same issue arose in state court when we…

Calaway ex Rel. Calaway v. Schucker

The plaintiff's amicus here argues that the legal disability statute, Tennessee Code Annotated section…