Court Amends Malpractice Venue Rules: On August 25, 2022, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania adopted amendments to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 1006, 2130, 2156, and 2179 governing venue in medical professional liability actions. Pa.R.Civ.P. 1006(a.1) was adopted in 2002 and provided that “a medical professional liability action may be brought against a health care provider for a medical professional liability claim only in a county in which the cause of action arose.”
Adopted almost 20 years ago, the special venue rules represented a significant change from the status quo. Generally, Pa.R.Civ.P. 1006 provided that venue lies in the county in which the cause of action arose or the county where a defendant could be served. When the defendant is a non-person entity, venue typically also exists in a county where the defendant conducts business. Pa.R.Civ.P. 2130, 2156, and 2179. Accordingly, venue was not constrained by the county where the cause of action arose. The rules provided a mechanism for a defendant to seek another forum based upon convenience or when “a fair and impartial trial cannot be held.” Pa.R.Civ.P. 1006(d)(1)-(2).
Section 5101.1 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §5101.1, changed this approach by requiring that venue in medical malpractice actions be limited to the county where the injury occurred. The ostensible purpose of this provision was to save insurers money by reducing either the number of lawsuits and/or the size of awards to injured parties.
The Civil Procedural Rules Committee stated in its Adoption Report discussing its recommendation for adopting the amendments: “Lost in rhetoric is the perspective of the victim of medical malpractice. There appears to be a misconception that patients harmed by the negligent actions of healthcare providers somehow enjoy a windfall verdict in more populous counties. Many of these patients have endured substantial injuries seriously lessening their quality of life in perpetuity, requiring permanent medical care and assistance in activities of daily living, and causing the patient and their families to endure lifelong pain, suffering, and loss of companionship. These are serious, complicated, and tragic cases. There is no windfall; no one gains. The stark reality is that patients and their family members would forgo all to avoid the injury cause by medical malpractice in the first place. A verdict can never make them whole … In sum, a majority of the Committee did not find justification for the continued disparate treatment of victims of medical malpractice as it pertains to venue. The impact of the restrictive venue rules was such that the savings accruing to defendants represents less-than-full compensation to plaintiffs for their injuries. Instead, a majority concluded that medical malpractice claims should be subject to the same venue rules applicable to other professional liability claims and tort claims in general. Likewise, defendants in medical malpractice actions can avail themselves of procedural mechanisms to seek a change in venue that are available to all other defendants in other types of actions.”
The amendments are effective January 1, 2023.
Carotid Dissection
Carotid artery dissection is a condition whereby the layers of the carotid artery are spontaneously separated. This potentially compromises blood flow to certain areas of the brain and can lead to a stroke. Furthermore, it can occur extracranially or intracranially and can lead to subarachnoid hemorrhage or brain ischemia. It is the most common cause of strokes in younger patients, and the importance of making a timely diagnosis is paramount to minimize potential morbidity and mortality of the disease. There is a huge variation in the presenting signs and symptoms of this disease which makes it extremely difficult to diagnose on initial presentation.
Carotid artery dissections occur in all age groups. They account for 2.5% of all strokes. It is a common cause of stroke in patients younger than 40 years old. In all young patients, 20% of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) are caused by carotid artery dissection. The median age is in the mid-40s, and there seems to be a slightly higher incidence in males versus females.
Click on the “Contact Us Now” tab to the right, visit our website, or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find medical malpractice attorneys in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.