A Summary of Virginia Medical Malpractice Laws

In many respects, Virginia has been more conservativeS.E.2d 307 (1999); Etheridge v. Medical Center
about modifying the common law than its sister states.Hospitals, 237 Va. 87, 376 S.E.2d 525 (1989).
To the extent modifications have been approved,A settlement with one defendant reduces the
many restrict rather than expand the rights of themaximum liability of the others, because the cap limits
victims of medical negligence. For example, Virginia hasthe total amount recoverable for an injury to a patient,
adopted three major modifications of medicalregardless of the number of theories or defendants.
malpractice law: a damage cap, screening of proposedFairfax Hospital System v. Nevitt, 249 Va. 591, 457
lawsuits by a medical review panel, and a state fundS.E.2d 10 (1995). This includes punitive damages. Bulala
to compensate victims of birth-related neurologicalv. Boyd, 239 Va. 218, 389 S.E.2d 670 (1990). In cases
injuries. Much of the legislation specific to medicalarising prior to March 28, 1994, when the definition of
malpractice can be found in the Medical Malpractice"health care provider" was broadened in Va. Code
Act, Va. Code Ann. §§ 8.01-581.1 toAnn. § 8.01-581.1, a physician's professional
8.01-581.20.corporation may be subject to uncapped liability.
Statutes of LimitationsSchwartz v. Brownlee, 253 Va. 159, 482 S.E.2d 827
All medical malpractice actions for injury (as opposed(1997).
to death) must be brought within two years from theVirginia limits punitive damages to $350,000. Va. Code
date the cause of action accrued. Va. Code Ann.Ann. § 8.01-38.1. This cap has also been
§ 8.01-243(A). In § 8.01-230, a cause ofdetermined to be constitutional by the Fourth Circuit
action "accrues" at the time of injury: "the cause ofCourt of Appeals. Wackenhut Applied Technologies
action shall be deemed to accrue and the prescribedCenter, Inc. v. Sygnetron Protection Systems, Inc., 979
limitation period shall begin to run from the date theF.2d 980 (4th Cir. 1992).
injury is sustained in the case of injury to the person...Statutory Cap on Attorneys' Fees
and not when the resulting damage is discovered."There is no Virginia statute setting a limit on attorneys'
This two-year limitation has long been applicable, andfees in medical malpractice actions.
strictly enforced, in Virginia. Virginia is one of thePeriodic Payments
minority states that use the "date-of-the-act" rule,Periodic payments or structured settlements are
which means that the plaintiff must file suit within twoallowed, but not required in Virginia. A settlement
years of the date of the injury regardless of howagreement on behalf of a disabled person, including the
obscure or undiscoverable the injury might have been.situation where the plaintiff is a minor (under the age of
Exceptions to the two-year rule are (i) cases involving18) involving periodic payments must be reviewed by
minors or mentally incompetent people who are in lawthe court and secured by a bond or insurance. Va.
regarded as unable to know their legal rights and (ii)Code Ann. § 8.01-424.
cases where the injury was fraudulently concealedCollateral Source Rule
from the person.Virginia recognizes the collateral source rule, under
The Virginia Supreme Court rejected the judicialwhich the plaintiff's receipt of collateral payments
adoption of a discovery rule, Nunnally v. Artis, 254 Va.(health insurance, paid leave of absence from work,
247, 492 S.E.2d 126, (1997), but held that "continuingetc.) does not reduce his recovery. This protection is
treatment for the same conditions" tolls the statute ofstatutory for lost income (Va. Code Ann. §
limitations until treatment ends. Grubbs v. Rawls, 2358.01-35) but the courts follow the rule for all damages
Va. 607, 369 S.E.2d 683 (1988). The court definedin tort cases. Schickling v. Aspinall, 235 Va. 472, 369
"continuous treatment" as not "mere continuity of aS.E.2d 172 (1988).
general physician-patient relationship; we meanPre-Judgment Interest
diagnosis and treatment for the same relating illness orIn Advanced Marine Enterprises v. PRC, Inc., 256 Va.
injuries, continuing after the alleged act of malpractice."106, 501 S.E.2d 148 (1998), which was not a malpractice
The court acknowledged, however, the rule would notcase, the Virginia Supreme Court reversed an award
apply to a single, isolated act of malpractice. Farley v.of pre-judgment interest on the unliquidated part of the
Goode, 219 Va. 969, 252 S.E.2d 594 (1979). In otherdamages, stating, "Generally, prejudgment interest is
words, when an act of malpractice occurred and thatnot allowed on unliquidated damages in dispute
physician continued to see the patient over a coursebetween the parties." This should apply to most
of years for an unrelated condition, the rule would notmedical malpractice claims. However, the decision also
apply.notes that Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-382 leaves the
In foreign object cases (surgical sponges, needles, etc.)date from which interest should run to the sound
and cases of fraud or concealment (i.e., alteration ofdiscretion of the trial court. In Pulliam v. Coastal
medical records) the statute is extended to one yearEmergency Services, Inc., 257 Va. 1, 509 S.E.2d 307
from the date the object or injury is discovered or(1999), the court reversed an award of pre-judgment
reasonably should have been discovered. However,interest because it exceeded the damage cap, but did
this extension is subject to a ten-year limit from thenot comment on whether such interest should have
time the cause of action accrued. Va. Code Ann.been awarded at all. In cases where pre-judgment
§ 8.01-243(C).interest is proper, the rate is six percent. Va. Code
In cases in which the health care provider's negligenceAnn. § 6.1-330.54.
caused the patient's death (Wrongful Death Claims),Birth Injury Claims
suit must be filed within two years of death. Va. CodeVirginia does not have a general patient compensation
Ann. § 8.01-244(B).fund covering all medical malpractice claims. However,
If a person entitled to bring a personal action dies withthe Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Act
no such action pending before the expiration of [the(Va. Code Ann. §§ 38.2-5000 to 38.2-5021),
two-year] limitation period... then an action may becovers infants who suffer permanent, disabling
commenced by the decedent's personaldamage to the brain or spine caused by oxygen
representative before the expiration of the limitationdeprivation or mechanical injury during labor, delivery, or
period... or within one year after his qualification asresuscitation. This no-fault program is the exclusive
personal representative, whichever occurs later.remedy for such infants and their parents against
However, § 8.01-229(B)(6) states that:participating physicians and hospitals, who must pay an
[i]f there is an interval of more than two yearsannual assessment. Va. Code Ann. §§
between the death of any person in whose favor . . . a38.2-5001 and 38.2-5002. A claim filed under this
cause of action has accrued or shall subsequentlystatute proceeds in an adversarial fashion and the
accrue and the qualification of such person's personalVirginia Attorney General represents the Fund in
representative, such personal representative shall, foropposing the infant's claim.
the purposes of [the statute], be deemed to haveIf the claim is determined to be compensable, the Fund
qualified on the last day of such two-year period.provides for lifetime medical expenses as well as
A parent's action for medical expenses caused byone-half of the Virginia average weekly wage after
injury to a minor must be brought within five years. Va.the child reaches age eighteen. Va. Code Ann. §
Code Ann. § 8.01-243(B). A minor's medical38.2-5009. Many hospitals and physicians choose not
malpractice action for injury or death must beto participate. In cases arising prior to April 1, 2000, a
commenced within two years from the date of theparticipating physician's professional corporation may
last act of negligence, unless the child is less than eightbe sued even in cases otherwise covered exclusively
years of age, in which case the action must beby the fund. Jan Paul Fruiterman, M.D. & Associates v.
brought by the child's tenth birthday. Va. Code Ann.Waziri, 259 Va. 540, 525 S.E.2d 552 (2000). Although
§ 8.01-243.1. The Virginia Supreme Court hasthe legislature promptly closed this loophole by
upheld the constitutionality of this statute. Willis v. Mullett,expanding the definition of "participating physician" in
263 Va. 653, 561 S.E.2d 705 (2002). Incapacity (typicallyVa. Code Ann. § 38.2-5001, the Virginia Supreme
a substantial mental or physical handicap) also tolls theCourt declined to apply the amendment retroactively.
running of the statute of limitations during the period ofBerner v. Mills, 265 Va. 408, 579 S.E.2d 159 (2003).
incapacity. Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-229(A).Immunities
Contributory or Comparative NegligenceVirginia has waived sovereign immunity in tort cases,
Virginia recognizes the doctrine of contributorysubject to significant limitations. No claimant may
negligence in medical malpractice cases. A plaintiff'srecover more than $100,000 or the limits of applicable
contributory negligence may bar her recovery entirely,insurance, whichever is greater. In medical negligence
but the patient's negligence must be concurrent withcases, the immunity most often comes into
the defendant's negligence. Sawyer v. Comerci, 264consideration when there is a claim against the Medical
Va. 68, 563 S.E.2d 748 (2002); Ponirakis v. Choi, 262College of Virginia or the University of Virginia Health
Va. 119, 546 S.E.2d 707 (2001).System. For example, sovereign immunity has been
Joint and Several Liabilityapplied to protect hospital administrators as well as
Virginia imposes joint and several liability on jointsurgical interns and residents at the University of
tortfeasors. Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-443. Thus, anyVirginia Hospital. Lawhorne v. Harlan, 214 Va. 405, 200
joint tortfeasor against whom judgment is entered isS.E.2d 569 (1973), overruled on other grounds, First
liable to the plaintiff for the entire judgment, regardlessVirginia Bank v. Baker, 225 Va. 72, 301 S.E.2d 8 (1983);
of the tortfeasor's degree or percentage of fault. ForHall v. Roberts, 548 F. Supp. 498 (W.D. Va. 1982). This
example, in a hospital setting, if the attending doctorimmunity may extend to other physicians employed by
and nurse are both negligent, then each one can bethe state, depending on the degree of control
held responsible for the patient's entire injury even ifexercised over them, Lohr v. Larsen, 246 Va. 81, 431
part of that injury was caused by the other'sS.E.2d 642, (1993), but never to independent
negligence.contractors. Atkinson v. Sachno, 261 Va!
Vicarious Liability. 278, 541 S.E.2d 902 (2001). Virginia has not waived
Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, hospitals insovereign immunity for local units of government.
Virginia are vicariously liable for the negligence of theirMunicipalities are immune for negligence in the
employees but not that of independent contractors.performance of governmental functions, including the
McDonald v. Hampton Training School for Nurses, 254operation of a hospital. Edwards v. Portsmouth, 237
Va. 79, 486 S.E.2d 299 (1997). Whether a physicianVa. 167, 375 S.E.2d 747 (1989) (dictum).
should be considered an employee is a question ofA charitable entity is not liable to its beneficiaries for
fact not to be determined by whether the hospital callsthe negligent acts of its agents if due care has been
him one, but by the factors of selection andexercised in their selection and retention. Mann v.
engagement, payment of compensation, power ofSentara Hospitals, Inc., 59 Va. Cir. 433, 2002 Va. Cir.
dismissal, and (most importantly) power to control theLEXIS 363 (2002) (discussing application of the
physician's work. A physician's exercise of professionaldoctrine to a medical faculty foundation). However,
judgment in the performance of professional duties ischaritable immunity has been withdrawn from hospitals,
a factor, but not the only factor, in deciding whetherexcept where a hospital renders exclusively charitable
the hospital has the power to control his work. There ismedical services, or where the patient signed an
also authority for holding a hospital liable for the act ofexpress agreement providing that all medical services
a physician on the theory of negligent credentialing.would be supplied on a charitable basis. Va. Code Ann.
Stottlemyer v. Ghramm, 2001 Va. Cir. LEXIS 501 (Va.§ 8.01-38.
Cir. Ct. July 13, 2001)(affirmed at 2004 Va. LEXIS 99Medical Review Panels
(2004). In other wor!ds, a hospital can be held legallyThe Virginia Medical Malpractice Act provides for a
responsible for granting hospital admission andsystem of medical malpractice review panels to
treatment privileges to an unqualified physician.assess the validity of medical malpractice claims. At
Expert Testimonythe request of either party, the Supreme Court of
Except for rare cases within the common knowledgeVirginia appoints a panel to review the claim, consisting
and experience of lay jurors, expert testimony isof two doctors, two lawyers, and a non-voting judge
necessary to establish the standard of care, aas chairman. Va. Code Ann. §§ 8.01-581.2
deviation from the standard, and the proximate causeand 8.01-581.3. The panel determines whether the
of injury. Perdieu v. Blackstone Family Practice Center,evidence supports the conclusion that the health care
Inc., 264 Va. 408, 568 S.E.2d 703 (2002). To testify asprovider failed to comply with the relevant standard of
an expert on the standard of care a witness mustcare and whether that failure proximately caused the
demonstrate expert knowledge of the standards ofinjury. Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-581.7. The findings of
the defendant's specialty and have had an activethe panel are non-binding and the claimant has the
clinical practice in either the defendant's specialty, or aoption of filing a lawsuit after the panel has made its
related field of medicine, within one year of the date ofruling. However, any opinion of the medical review
the alleged act or omission. Va. Code Ann. §panel is admissible as evidence in a subsequent action.
8.01-581.20.Both parties have the right to call panel members,
Damage Capsexcept the chairman, as witnesses. Va. Code Ann.
Virginia imposes a cap (limit) on damages of all kinds in§ 8.01-581.8.
medical malpractice cases. For claims arising out ofArbitration
acts or omissions prior to August 1, 1999, the damageArbitration is a process by which potential litigants can
cap is $1 million. For acts or omissions on or afterresolve their dispute without resorting to the civil court
August 1, 1999, and before July 1, 2000, the cap is $1.5system. In most arbitration cases, the parties agree to
million. The cap is increasing by $50,000 every July 1.arbitrate their dispute after the event occurs and the
Two final increases of $75,000 beginning in 2007 willclaim arises. However, parties may also agree in
bring the damage cap to $2 million for acts oradvance of treatment to binding arbitration of any
omissions on or after July 1, 2008. Va. Code Ann.claim, so long as the patient has the option to withdraw
§ 8.01-581.15. The Virginia Supreme Court hasfrom the agreement within 60 days after the
twice considered this legislation and held that it doestermination of treatment. Va. Code Ann. §
not violate the U.S. or Virginia constitutions. Pulliam v.8.01-581.12.
Coastal Emergency Services, Inc., 257 Va. 1, 509