Indiana's Journey Account Statute - When Can It Save Your Case
In EADS v. Community Hospital, 909 N.E.2d 1009 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), Plaintiff brought a medical malpractice claim against a hospital after receiving treatment for a broken ankle. Following her treatment, plaintiff’s request for a wheelchair was denied. She was instead given crutches and ultimately fell while leaving the hospital, resulting in her injuries. Plaintiff initially filed a general liability negligence claim in Lake County Superior Court. The hospital then filed a motion to dismiss, arguing plaintiff’s claim was a medical malpractice claim requiring it to first be filed before the Indiana Department of Insurance (“IDOI”). Plaintiff argued it was premises liability/general liability case, which does not fall under the Medical Malpractice Act (“MMA”). The trial court agreed with the hospital and dismissed plaintiff’s claim without prejudice. Plaintiff did not appeal this ruling. Approximately two weeks after plaintiff’s case was dismissed, she re-filed her claim with the IDOI. The hospital responded by filing a petition for preliminary determination of law with the trial court, requesting summary judgment be granted in its favor. The hospital argued in its petition that plaintiff’s claim was barred because it was filed with IDOI outside of the MMA’s two-year statute of limitations period. Plaintiff filed initially filed her claim in the Lake County Superior Court within the two-year statute of limitations period, but plaintiff’s filing with IDOI was outside of the two-year period. The trial court agreed and dismissed plaintiff’s claim with prejudice.
On appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals first looked at the Journey Account Statute. IC § 34-11-8-1. In summary, the Journey Account Statute is used to “save an action filed in the wrong court by allowing the plaintiff enough time to refile the same claim in the correct forum.” For example, “the statute enables an action dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction in one state to be refilled in another state despite the intervening running of the statute of limitations.”
Consequently, for plaintiff’s claim to be saved under this statute, she would have to establish that her medical malpractice claim was a continuation of the premises/general liability negligence claim she originally filed. The Court held it could not extend the Journey’s Account Statute to the plaintiff in this case. It explained this is not a case where the plaintiff filed an initial medical malpractice complaint in a timely manner in the wrong forum, and then later refiled that same complaint in the proper forum. Instead, plaintiff first filed the premises/general liability negligence claim in Lake County court, and waited to file her proposed complaint with the IDOI until two weeks before the trial court dismissed her complaint for lack of jurisdiction. No continuation was found and the Court explained “[t]o hold otherwise would permit [plaintiff] an untimely second bite at the apple. . . .” The trial court’s grant of summary judgment in the hospital and dismissal of plaintiff’s claim was affirmed.
