O'Connor v. Wong1/28/2003
his claim, O'Connor named QMC as a target respondent. He did not identify any other target respondents, other than referring generally to "doctors" at QMC. He stated his "full intent to bring the most severe neglect & malpractice charges against the doctor in uestion upon my original visit to Q.E. as well as charges against the medical institution who hired & employs him."
On April 13, 1995, the MCCP sent a letter to O'Connor advising him the claim was incomplete and that he needed to specifically identify each respondent by name and failure to do so may not toll the statute of limitations. The MCCP also provided O'Connor with a brochure outlining the steps necessary to make a claim. Additionally, they advised him to obtain a copy of his medical records to assist in identifying potential respondents.
On May 2, 1995, O'Connor responded to the letter from the MCCP by restating his claim but failing again to identify with specificity the names of the respondents. He further requested that the MCCP obtain his records and search the records for the identity of the physicians O'Connor wished to target for medical malpractice.
On May 5, 1995, the MCCP sent another letter to O'Connor telling him they were a neutral board, they did not participate in discovery requests, and the burden of obtaining medical records was his. Additionally, they told him the claim was accepted on behalf of QMC and O'Connor would need to notify the MCCP of the identity of the other respondents as soon as he identified them.
On October 21, 1996, O'Connor's attorney, William H. Elkner, filed with the MCCP O'Connor's amended claim identifying Defendants (Dr. Wong, EGI, Dr. Meagher, and RAI).
On December 17, 1996, in the instant case, O'Connor filed a complaint for damages alleging two counts: (1) medical malpractice against Dr. Wong and Dr. Meagher, and (2) respondeat superior against QMC, Sutter Health Pacific (SHP), RAI, and EGI.
By stipulated order filed on July 7, 1997, O'Connor's complaint against SHP was dismissed. By stipulated order filed on December 27, 1999, O'Connor's complaint against QMC was dismissed.
On December 1, 2000, Dr. Wong and EGI filed a joint motion for summary judgment and, on December 26, 2000, Dr. Meagher and RAI filed a substantive joinder. On January 26, 2001, the circuit court entered an order granting the motion for summary judgment in favor of Defendants. On April 19, 2001, the circuit court entered its findings of fact, conclusions of law and order granting the motion. The Judgment, entered on August 2, 2001, awarded costs against O'Connor in favor of EGI and Dr. Wong.
DISCUSSION
1.
O'Connor contends that on April 12, 1995, he complied with the requirements of HRS § 671-12 by filing a claim with the MCCP. Regarding QMC, we agree. Regarding Defendants, we disagree because as to them, O'Connor did not comply with the HRS § 671-12 filing requirements until October 21, 1996. Therefore, as to Defendants, no HRS § 671-18 tolling of the HRS § 657-7.3 statute of limitations occurred until October 21, 1996, and, by then, it was too late.
2.
HRCP Rule 15 governs "Amended and supplemental pleadings." O'Connor cites HRCP Rule 15(c) entitled, "Relation back of amendments," in support of his argument that he filed his claim with the MCCP on April 12, 1995, and that his amended claim identifying Dr. Wong and Dr. Meagher, filed October 21, 1996, relates back, thus tolling the statute.
O'Connor misunderstands the requirements of HRS § 671-16. We agree that O'Connor's April 12, 1995 claim to the MCCP was timely regarding QMC. We agree with the circui
Page 1 2 3 4 Hawaii Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|