Charles McKeen, M.D. v. Billy Turner

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court held that a medical-malpractice plaintiff may pursue theories of malpractice during litigation after the Medical Review Panel process when the proposed complaint encompasses those theories and the related evidence was presented to the panel. The court granted transfer, adopted and incorporated the Indiana Court of Appeals’ opinion, and expressly disapproved K.D. v. Chambers to the extent it conflicted with Miller v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc.

Holdings

1. A medical-malpractice plaintiff may raise a theory of alleged malpractice during subsequent litigation if the proposed complaint encompasses the theory and the evidence relating to the theory was before the Medical Review Panel.
2. K.D. v. Chambers is at odds with Miller on the issue addressed and is expressly disapproved.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a medical-malpractice plaintiff may pursue in court a theory of malpractice concerning anticoagulation medication when the proposed complaint submitted to the Medical Review Panel did not expressly identify that theory but encompassed it and the supporting evidence was before the panel.
2. Whether K.D. v. Chambers remains consistent with Miller v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc. on the scope of malpractice theories that may be pursued after Medical Review Panel proceedings.

Disposition

other