Opinion
No. 2-051 / 00-1429
Filed October 16, 2002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Bremer County, Paul W. Riffel, Judge.
The plaintiff appeals from the district court's ruling dismissing his medical malpractice action as barred by Iowa Code sections 614.1(9) and 614.8 (1999). AFFIRMED.
Christine Skilton and David Skilton of Cronin, Skilton Skilton, Nashua, for appellant.
Gaylen V. Hassman of Engelbrecht, Ackerman Hassman, Waverly, for appellees Rohlf Memorial Clinic, David MacMillan, and Michael Berstler.
George L. Weilein of Gallagher, Langlas Gallagher, P.C., Waterloo, for appellee Waverly Municipal Hospital Foundation.
Heard by Huitink, P.J., and Zimmer and Miller, JJ.
Nathan Seamans appeals from the district court's ruling dismissing his medical malpractice action as being barred by Iowa Code sections 614.1(9) and 614.8 (1999). Seamans contends (1) section 614.1(9)(b) does not apply to bar an individual who was a minor at the time of the injury from bringing an action after attaining majority, and (2) the district court erred in relying on, and incorporating into its ruling, alleged facts asserted by the defendants that were not part of the pleadings. We affirm the district court.
Seamans claims the defendants committed acts of negligence, which caused him injury, during his birth on April 5, 1981. Seamans reached the age of majority on April 5, 1999. He filed the present action on March 22, 2000 against David MacMillan, M.D., Michael Berstler, M.D., Rohlf Memorial Clinic, and Waverly Municipal Hospital Foundation. All defendants filed motions to dismiss alleging that the statute of limitations governing medical malpractice actions had expired and Seaman's cause of action was barred. The district court determined that Seaman's cause of action falls within the 1997 amendments to sections 614.1(9) and 614.8(2), and is barred by these statutory provisions. We review for the correction of errors at law. Estate of Dyer v. Krug, 533 N.W.2d 221, 222 (Iowa 1995).
We conclude the outcome of this case is controlled by our supreme court's recent decision in Albrecht v. General Motors Corp., 648 N.W.2d 87 (Iowa 2002). Section 614.1(9) imposes a two-year statute of limitations on the filing of medical malpractice suits that runs from the discovery of the injury and, in addition, imposes a six-year absolute limit on such claims that runs, not from the accrual of the claim, but from the act causing the injury. Albrecht, 648 N.W.2d at 92. The only exception to these limitations is found in subsection (9)(b) which makes clear that if a medical malpractice action is brought on behalf of a minor who was under the age of eight when the alleged negligent act occurred, the suit must be filed no later than the minor's tenth birthday or within two years after the date the claimant first became aware of the injury, but in no event no later than six years after the date of the alleged negligent act, whichever is later.
The six-year bar on bringing medical malpractice claims in section 614.1(9)(a) is a statute of repose. Id. Our supreme court concluded in Albrecht that section 614.8(2) (extending time limitations for commencing actions for minors) does not apply to the statute of repose found in section 614.1(2A)(a). Id. at 94-95. Likewise, we determine that section 614.8 does not apply to the statute of repose found in section 614.1(9).
Furthermore, we note that the legislature has specifically excluded from the tolling provision in section 614.8 those claims accruing under section 614.1(9). Iowa Code § 614.8(2). Therefore, the legislature has determined that a minor must comply with the provisions of section 614.1(9) to bring a medical malpractice action in the courts of this state. Seamans has failed to comply with those provisions. In view of this conclusion, we find it unnecessary to address Seaman's claim that the district court improperly considered as evidence facts not alleged in the petition in granting defendants' motions to dismiss.
We affirm the district court's ruling.