Saul v. Jenkins

Summary

The Mississippi Supreme Court held that licensing is a prerequisite for an allegedly health-care-related entity to invoke the sixty-day pre-suit notice protections for medical-malpractice actions under Mississippi Code section 15-1-36(15). Because the record did not establish whether Extra Care was properly licensed, the court reversed the dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The notice requirement of Mississippi Code section 15-1-36(15) is mandatory and jurisdictional, so a defendant need not plead or argue it as a defense.
2. Licensing is a prerequisite for a defendant to receive the protections afforded by Mississippi's medical-malpractice limitations, including the sixty-day notice requirement in section 15-1-36(15).
3. Dismissal was improper because Extra Care's licensing status was a material issue of fact that had not been resolved.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant must plead or argue Mississippi Code section 15-1-36(15)'s sixty-day notice requirement as an affirmative defense.
2. Whether an allegedly unlicensed nursing home or health-care provider may invoke the protections of Mississippi Code section 15-1-36(15).
3. Whether dismissal was proper when the record did not establish whether Extra Care was a licensed health-care provider.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded