In Everhart v. Coshocton County Memorial Hospital, the Supreme Court of Ohio addressed the applicability of the medical-claim statute of repose to wrongful-death claims arising from medical care. The case arose from events beginning in 2003 and involved prolonged litigation concerning medical malpractice and statutory interpretation. The central issue was whether Ohio’s four-year statute of repose for medical claims applied to a wrongful-death claim based on alleged medical negligence. The Court ultimately held that such claims were included under the statute of repose.
The case began following a 2003 car accident in which Todd Everhart was transported to Coshocton County Memorial Hospital. There, x-rays revealed an opacity in his lung, noted by Dr. Joseph Mendiola. Although this report was distributed per hospital policy, backup physician Dr. Mohamed Hamza claimed he never received it. Mr. Everhart was transferred to another facility and later discharged. Nearly three years afterward, he returned to Coshocton Hospital with new symptoms. Scans revealed he had advanced-stage lung cancer. He passed away two months later.
In 2008, Mr. Everhart’s wife, Machelle Everhart, filed a complaint both individually and as administrator of her husband's estate. The complaint alleged medical malpractice and wrongful death, focusing on the failure to notify or follow up regarding the 2003 x-ray findings.
The case proceeded for several years, including a separate appeal in 2013. In 2017, the defendants sought to assert that the case was barred under R.C. 2305.113(C), the statute of repose for medical claims. They argued that the law barred the claims despite them being filed within the statute of limitations, due to the lapse of four years from the alleged negligence.
The trial court stayed the case during Coshocton Hospital's bankruptcy proceedings but later permitted the defendants to amend their answers to include the statute of repose defense. The court then granted judgment on the pleadings to Dr. Mendiola and denied Mrs. Everhart’s motion to amend her complaint.
The Tenth District Court of Appeals reversed this decision, holding that wrongful-death claims are distinct from medical claims and not subject to the four-year statute of repose. The court based its reasoning on prior Ohio Supreme Court cases distinguishing between wrongful-death and medical-malpractice claims.
The Supreme Court of Ohio reviewed whether the statute of repose under R.C. 2305.113(C) applied to wrongful-death claims stemming from medical care. The Court emphasized the statute’s broad definition of "medical claim" as encompassing any civil action arising from medical diagnosis, care, or treatment. It concluded that wrongful-death claims based on such care were clearly included under the statute’s scope.
The Court rejected arguments that the wrongful-death statute in R.C. Chapter 2125 exempted such claims from the repose provision, noting that no express statutory language negated their inclusion. The Court also noted that wrongful-death claims are not defined as derivative claims in the medical-claim statute, but that did not preclude their inclusion under the broader definition.
Finally, the Court reversed the appellate ruling and remanded the case for consideration of the remaining procedural issue concerning the denial of the amended complaint.
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that the four-year statute of repose for medical claims applies to wrongful-death actions arising from medical care. The ruling underscored the importance of statutory definitions and reinforced the legislature’s authority to set repose periods even for claims that arise posthumously. The case was remanded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings on procedural grounds.
If you have questions about how statutes of limitations or repose might affect your medical malpractice or wrongful death case, our attorneys at Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC can help you understand your legal options and guide you through the claims process.