Elliot v. Durrani

Citations

• 178 N.E.3d 977
• 2021 Ohio 3055

Syllabus

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – STATUTE OF REPOSE – R.C. 2305.113 – R.C. 2305.15(A) – ABSENT-DEFENDANT STATUTE – RICO: The trial court erred in dismissing plaintiff patient's medical claim against defendant doctor where defendant fled the country less than four years after plaintiff's claim arose, because R.C. 2305.15(A), the absent-defendant statute, tolled the four-year medical statute of repose in R.C. 2305.113(A). The trial court did not err in dismissing plaintiff's medical claim against defendant doctor's medical practice of which he was the sole owner: the absent-defendant statute did not apply to toll the statute of repose as to the medical practice where the medical practice was not out of state, absconded or concealed and the physician-patient relationship had ended. The repose period was not extended by the period of postoperative care where the alleged negligently-performed surgery formed the basis of plaintiff's medical claim. The revocation of defendant doctor's medical license did not transform plaintiff's medical claims into nonmedical claims for purposes of the statute of repose. Plaintiff's fraud and negligent-credentialing claims were medical claims subject to the medical statute of repose. The trial court did not err in denying plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint to add a civil state law RICO claim under the Ohio Corrupt Practices Act, R.C. 2923.31 et seq., where the proposed claim lacked the specificity required by the act, and therefore, amendment would have been futile.