Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-2311 Arroyo v. U.S.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 1, 2011//

10-2311 Arroyo v. U.S.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 1, 2011//

Listen to this article

Torts
FTCA; medical malpractice; statute of limitations

Injuries can have multiple causes and a plaintiff’s claim under the FTCA only accrues when he obtains sufficient knowledge of the government-related cause of his injury.

“We also find that the district court did not err in finding that a reasonably diligent person in the Arroyos’ position in 2003 would have lacked information sufficient to prompt a deeper inquiry into whether Christian’s doctors caused his injuries. In order to prevail on its statute of limitations defense, the government needed to show that a reasonable person, when informed that his or her infant’s injuries were caused by an infection that had been transmitted during birth, would have searched for potential iatrogenic causes for the injuries. The United States did not meet this burden. First, the government failed to present any evidence establishing that injuries caused by birth-transmitted infections are typically caused by doctors. Second, and even more significantly, the government neglected to argue that iatrogenic causes are frequent enough that a reasonably diligent person would have investigated whether there was a doctor-related cause for Christian’s injuries. While these omissions, on their own, provide more than sufficient grounds for affirming the district court’s decision, we also note that courts have found that it is reasonable for individuals presented with similar information about the etiology of birth-related injuries to assume that the hospital’s staff did everything they could to prevent the injury. See, e.g., Valdez ex rel. Donely v. United States, 518 F.3d 173, 180 (2d Cir. 2008) (‘When a doctor reports that a person is “born with” a problem, it could reasonably have the effect of leading a person to believe that the injury was completely unavoidable.’); Rice v. United States, 889 F. Supp. 1466, 1471 (N.D. Okl. 1995).

Affirmed.

10-2311 Arroyo v. U.S.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, St. Eve, J., Cudahy, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests