METHODIST HOSPITAL OF INDIANA, INC. v. Ray
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Pluard Ex Rel. Pluard v. Patients Compensation Fund (Ind. Ct. App. 1999)
- Kathay Van Dyne v. IOM Health Systems LP, d/b/a Lutheran Hospital of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2013)
- Riggs v. West Virginia University Hospitals, Inc. (W. Va. 2008)
- Peters v. Cummins Mental Health, Inc. (Ind. Ct. App. 2003)
- Thomas v. Deitsch (Ind. Ct. App. 2001)
- Winona Memorial Hospital, Ltd. Partnership v. Kuester (Ind. Ct. App. 2000)
- Cacdac v. West (Ind. Ct. App. 1999)
- Doe Ex Rel Roe v. Madison Center Hospital (Ind. Ct. App. 1995)
- State v. Peters (Ind. Ct. App. 1994)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This case involves a claim by Robert W. Ray that he contracted Legionnaire's Pneumonia Virus while hospitalized at Methodist Hospital for kidney stone removal. In his complaint against Methodist, Ray alleged that the hospital negligently allowed its premises to become "infested and infected" with the virus. Methodist filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, inasmuch as the case had not been submitted to a Medical Review Panel pursuant to the Indiana Malpractice Act, LLC. 16-9.5-1-1 et seq. The Marion Circuit Court denied the motion, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
The Court of Appeals held that the Act does not apply to all claims made by a patient against a qualified health care provider. Methodist Hospital of Indiana, Inc. v. Ray (1990), Ind.App., 551 N.E.2d 463, 469. The Court of Appeals further ruled that Methodist had failed to meet its burden of establishing that the Act applied to Ray's claim. Id. at 467. However, the Court of Appeals noted the possibility that discovery or litigation could produce facts indicating that this case does fall within the Act's seope. Id. at 469.
This Court hereby grants transfer and, pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 11(B)(8), adopts the Court of Appeals' opinion in this case.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.