Discover Virginia


A Summary of Virginia Medical Malpractice Laws

In many respects, Virginia has been moreEmergency Services, Inc., 257 Va. 1, 509
conservative about modifying the common lawS.E.2d 307 (1999); Etheridge v. Medical
than its sister states. To the extentCenter Hospitals, 237 Va. 87, 376 S.E.2d 525
modifications have been approved, many(1989).
restrict rather than expand the rights of the
victims of medical negligence. For example,A settlement with one defendant reduces the
Virginia has adopted three majormaximum liability of the others, because the
modifications of medical malpractice law: acap limits the total amount recoverable for
damage cap, screening of proposed lawsuits byan injury to a patient, regardless of the
a medical review panel, and a state fund tonumber of theories or defendants. Fairfax
compensate victims of birth-relatedHospital System v. Nevitt, 249 Va. 591, 457
neurological injuries. Much of theS.E.2d 10 (1995). This includes punitive
legislation specific to medical malpracticedamages. Bulala v. Boyd, 239 Va. 218, 389
can be found in the Medical Malpractice Act,S.E.2d 670 (1990). In cases arising prior to
Va. Code Ann. §§ 8.01-581.1 toMarch 28, 1994, when the definition of
8.01-581.20."health care provider" was broadened in Va.
Code Ann. § 8.01-581.1, a physician's
Statutes  of  Limitationsprofessional corporation may be subject to
uncapped liability. Schwartz v. Brownlee, 253
All medical malpractice actions for injuryVa.  159,  482  S.E.2d  827  (1997).
(as opposed to death) must be brought within
two years from the date the cause of actionVirginia limits punitive damages to $350,000.
accrued. Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-243(A). InVa. Code Ann. § 8.01-38.1. This cap has
§ 8.01-230, a cause of action "accrues" atalso been determined to be constitutional by
the time of injury: "the cause of actionthe Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
shall be deemed to accrue and the prescribedWackenhut Applied Technologies Center, Inc.
limitation period shall begin to run from thev. Sygnetron Protection Systems, Inc., 979
date the injury is sustained in the case ofF.2d  980  (4th  Cir.  1992).
injury to the person... and not when the
resulting  damage  is  discovered."Statutory  Cap  on  Attorneys'  Fees
This two-year limitation has long beenThere is no Virginia statute setting a limit
applicable, and strictly enforced, inon attorneys' fees in medical malpractice
Virginia. Virginia is one of the minorityactions.
states that use the "date-of-the-act" rule,
which means that the plaintiff must file suitPeriodic  Payments
within two years of the date of the injury
regardless of how obscure or undiscoverablePeriodic payments or structured settlements
the injury might have been. Exceptions to theare allowed, but not required in Virginia. A
two-year rule are (i) cases involving minorssettlement agreement on behalf of a disabled
or mentally incompetent people who are in lawperson, including the situation where the
regarded as unable to know their legal rightsplaintiff is a minor (under the age of 18)
and (ii) cases where the injury wasinvolving periodic payments must be reviewed
fraudulently  concealed  from  the  person.by the court and secured by a bond or
insurance.  Va.  Code  Ann.  Â§  8.01-424.
The Virginia Supreme Court rejected the
judicial adoption of a discovery rule,Collateral  Source  Rule
Nunnally v. Artis, 254 Va. 247, 492 S.E.2d
126, (1997), but held that "continuingVirginia recognizes the collateral source
treatment for the same conditions" tolls therule, under which the plaintiff's receipt of
statute of limitations until treatment ends.collateral payments (health insurance, paid
Grubbs v. Rawls, 235 Va. 607, 369 S.E.2d 683leave of absence from work, etc.) does not
(1988). The court defined "continuousreduce his recovery. This protection is
treatment" as not "mere continuity of astatutory for lost income (Va. Code Ann. §
general physician-patient relationship; we8.01-35) but the courts follow the rule for
mean diagnosis and treatment for the sameall damages in tort cases. Schickling v.
relating illness or injuries, continuingAspinall, 235 Va. 472, 369 S.E.2d 172 (1988).
after the alleged act of malpractice." The
court acknowledged, however, the rule wouldPre-Judgment  Interest
not apply to a single, isolated act of
malpractice. Farley v. Goode, 219 Va. 969,In Advanced Marine Enterprises v. PRC, Inc.,
252 S.E.2d 594 (1979). In other words, when256 Va. 106, 501 S.E.2d 148 (1998), which was
an act of malpractice occurred and thatnot a malpractice case, the Virginia Supreme
physician continued to see the patient over aCourt reversed an award of pre-judgment
course of years for an unrelated condition,interest on the unliquidated part of the
the  rule  would  not  apply.damages, stating, "Generally, prejudgment
interest is not allowed on unliquidated
In foreign object cases (surgical sponges,damages in dispute between the parties." This
needles, etc.) and cases of fraud orshould apply to most medical malpractice
concealment (i.e., alteration of medicalclaims. However, the decision also notes that
records) the statute is extended to one yearVa. Code Ann. § 8.01-382 leaves the date
from the date the object or injury isfrom which interest should run to the sound
discovered or reasonably should have beendiscretion of the trial court. In Pulliam v.
discovered. However, this extension isCoastal Emergency Services, Inc., 257 Va. 1,
subject to a ten-year limit from the time the509 S.E.2d 307 (1999), the court reversed an
cause of action accrued. Va. Code Ann. §award of pre-judgment interest because it
8.01-243(C).exceeded the damage cap, but did not comment
on whether such interest should have been
In cases in which the health care provider'sawarded at all. In cases where pre-judgment
negligence caused the patient's deathinterest is proper, the rate is six percent.
(Wrongful Death Claims), suit must be filedVa.  Code  Ann.  Â§  6.1-330.54.
within two years of death. Va. Code Ann. §
8.01-244(B).Birth  Injury  Claims
If a person entitled to bring a personalVirginia does not have a general patient
action dies with no such action pendingcompensation fund covering all medical
before the expiration of [the two-year]malpractice claims. However, the
limitation period... then an action may beBirth-Related Neurological Injury
commenced by the decedent's personalCompensation Act (Va. Code Ann. §§
representative before the expiration of the38.2-5000 to 38.2-5021), covers infants who
limitation period... or within one year aftersuffer permanent, disabling damage to the
his qualification as personal representative,brain or spine caused by oxygen deprivation
whichever  occurs  later.or mechanical injury during labor, delivery,
or resuscitation. This no-fault program is
However,  Â§  8.01-229(B)(6)  states  that:the exclusive remedy for such infants and
their parents against participating
[i]f there is an interval of more than twophysicians and hospitals, who must pay an
years between the death of any person inannual assessment. Va. Code Ann. §§
whose favor . . . a cause of action has38.2-5001 and 38.2-5002. A claim filed under
accrued or shall subsequently accrue and thethis statute proceeds in an adversarial
qualification of such person's personalfashion and the Virginia Attorney General
representative, such personal representativerepresents the Fund in opposing the infant's
shall, for the purposes of [the statute], beclaim.
deemed to have qualified on the last day of
such  two-year  period.If the claim is determined to be compensable,
the Fund provides for lifetime medical
A parent's action for medical expenses causedexpenses as well as one-half of the Virginia
by injury to a minor must be brought withinaverage weekly wage after the child reaches
five years. Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-243(B). Aage eighteen. Va. Code Ann. § 38.2-5009.
minor's medical malpractice action for injuryMany hospitals and physicians choose not to
or death must be commenced within two yearsparticipate. In cases arising prior to April
from the date of the last act of negligence,1, 2000, a participating physician's
unless the child is less than eight years ofprofessional corporation may be sued even in
age, in which case the action must be broughtcases otherwise covered exclusively by the
by the child's tenth birthday. Va. Code Ann.fund. Jan Paul Fruiterman, M.D. & Associates
§ 8.01-243.1. The Virginia Supreme Courtv. Waziri, 259 Va. 540, 525 S.E.2d 552
has upheld the constitutionality of this(2000). Although the legislature promptly
statute. Willis v. Mullett, 263 Va. 653, 561closed this loophole by expanding the
S.E.2d 705 (2002). Incapacity (typically adefinition of "participating physician" in
substantial mental or physical handicap) alsoVa. Code Ann. § 38.2-5001, the Virginia
tolls the running of the statute ofSupreme Court declined to apply the amendment
limitations during the period of incapacity.retroactively. Berner v. Mills, 265 Va. 408,
Va.  Code  Ann.  Â§  8.01-229(A).579  S.E.2d  159  (2003).
Contributory  or  Comparative  NegligenceImmunities
Virginia recognizes the doctrine ofVirginia has waived sovereign immunity in
contributory negligence in medicaltort cases, subject to significant
malpractice cases. A plaintiff's contributorylimitations. No claimant may recover more
negligence may bar her recovery entirely, butthan $100,000 or the limits of applicable
the patient's negligence must be concurrentinsurance, whichever is greater. In medical
with the defendant's negligence. Sawyer v.negligence cases, the immunity most often
Comerci, 264 Va. 68, 563 S.E.2d 748 (2002);comes into consideration when there is a
Ponirakis v. Choi, 262 Va. 119, 546 S.E.2dclaim against the Medical College of Virginia
707  (2001).or the University of Virginia Health System.
For example, sovereign immunity has been
Joint  and  Several  Liabilityapplied to protect hospital administrators as
well as surgical interns and residents at the
Virginia imposes joint and several liabilityUniversity of Virginia Hospital. Lawhorne v.
on joint tortfeasors. Va. Code Ann. §Harlan, 214 Va. 405, 200 S.E.2d 569 (1973),
8.01-443. Thus, any joint tortfeasor againstoverruled on other grounds, First Virginia
whom judgment is entered is liable to theBank v. Baker, 225 Va. 72, 301 S.E.2d 8
plaintiff for the entire judgment, regardless(1983); Hall v. Roberts, 548 F. Supp. 498
of the tortfeasor's degree or percentage of(W.D. Va. 1982). This immunity may extend to
fault. For example, in a hospital setting, ifother physicians employed by the state,
the attending doctor and nurse are bothdepending on the degree of control exercised
negligent, then each one can be heldover them, Lohr v. Larsen, 246 Va. 81, 431
responsible for the patient's entire injuryS.E.2d 642, (1993), but never to independent
even if part of that injury was caused by thecontractors.  Atkinson  v.  Sachno,  261  Va!
other's  negligence.
. 278, 541 S.E.2d 902 (2001). Virginia has
Vicarious  Liabilitynot waived sovereign immunity for local units
of government. Municipalities are immune for
Under the doctrine of respondeat superior,negligence in the performance of governmental
hospitals in Virginia are vicariously liablefunctions, including the operation of a
for the negligence of their employees but nothospital. Edwards v. Portsmouth, 237 Va. 167,
that of independent contractors. McDonald v.375  S.E.2d  747  (1989)  (dictum).
Hampton Training School for Nurses, 254 Va.
79, 486 S.E.2d 299 (1997). Whether aA charitable entity is not liable to its
physician should be considered an employee isbeneficiaries for the negligent acts of its
a question of fact not to be determined byagents if due care has been exercised in
whether the hospital calls him one, but bytheir selection and retention. Mann v.
the factors of selection and engagement,Sentara Hospitals, Inc., 59 Va. Cir. 433,
payment of compensation, power of dismissal,2002 Va. Cir. LEXIS 363 (2002) (discussing
and (most importantly) power to control theapplication of the doctrine to a medical
physician's work. A physician's exercise offaculty foundation). However, charitable
professional judgment in the performance ofimmunity has been withdrawn from hospitals,
professional duties is a factor, but not theexcept where a hospital renders exclusively
only factor, in deciding whether the hospitalcharitable medical services, or where the
has the power to control his work. There ispatient signed an express agreement providing
also authority for holding a hospital liablethat all medical services would be supplied
for the act of a physician on the theory ofon a charitable basis. Va. Code Ann. §
negligent credentialing. Stottlemyer v.8.01-38.
Ghramm, 2001 Va. Cir. LEXIS 501 (Va. Cir. Ct.
July 13, 2001)(affirmed at 2004 Va. LEXIS 99Medical  Review  Panels
(2004). In other wor!ds, a hospital can be
held legally responsible for grantingThe Virginia Medical Malpractice Act provides
hospital admission and treatment privilegesfor a system of medical malpractice review
to  an  unqualified  physician.panels to assess the validity of medical
malpractice claims. At the request of either
Expert  Testimonyparty, the Supreme Court of Virginia appoints
a panel to review the claim, consisting of
Except for rare cases within the commontwo doctors, two lawyers, and a non-voting
knowledge and experience of lay jurors,judge as chairman. Va. Code Ann. §§
expert testimony is necessary to establish8.01-581.2 and 8.01-581.3. The panel
the standard of care, a deviation from thedetermines whether the evidence supports the
standard, and the proximate cause of injury.conclusion that the health care provider
Perdieu v. Blackstone Family Practice Center,failed to comply with the relevant standard
Inc., 264 Va. 408, 568 S.E.2d 703 (2002). Toof care and whether that failure proximately
testify as an expert on the standard of carecaused the injury. Va. Code Ann. §
a witness must demonstrate expert knowledge8.01-581.7. The findings of the panel are
of the standards of the defendant's specialtynon-binding and the claimant has the option
and have had an active clinical practice inof filing a lawsuit after the panel has made
either the defendant's specialty, or aits ruling. However, any opinion of the
related field of medicine, within one year ofmedical review panel is admissible as
the date of the alleged act or omission. Va.evidence in a subsequent action. Both parties
Code  Ann.  Â§  8.01-581.20.have the right to call panel members, except
the chairman, as witnesses. Va. Code Ann.
Damage  Caps§  8.01-581.8.
Virginia imposes a cap (limit) on damages ofArbitration
all kinds in medical malpractice cases. For
claims arising out of acts or omissions priorArbitration is a process by which potential
to August 1, 1999, the damage cap is $1litigants can resolve their dispute without
million. For acts or omissions on or afterresorting to the civil court system. In most
August 1, 1999, and before July 1, 2000, thearbitration cases, the parties agree to
cap is $1.5 million. The cap is increasing byarbitrate their dispute after the event
$50,000 every July 1. Two final increases ofoccurs and the claim arises. However, parties
$75,000 beginning in 2007 will bring themay also agree in advance of treatment to
damage cap to $2 million for acts orbinding arbitration of any claim, so long as
omissions on or after July 1, 2008. Va. Codethe patient has the option to withdraw from
Ann. § 8.01-581.15. The Virginia Supremethe agreement within 60 days after the
Court has twice considered this legislationtermination of treatment. Va. Code Ann. §
and held that it does not violate the U.S. or8.01-581.12.
Virginia constitutions. Pulliam v. Coastal



1 A B C 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100