THI RD DI VI SI ON

DI L LA RD, P. J.

, GOBEI L and HODGES, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

October 17, 2019



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A1 34 9

. L YLAH CARROLL, AS AD M INISTRATOR FOR

THE E S T ATE OF BYRON T YRONE CARROLL v

. PIEDM ONT M EDICAL CARE CORPORATION et al

.

D I LLA R D , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

Ly l ah Carro ll

, act i n g in h er c a p a c i t y as ad m i n i s t rat o r fo r t h e es t at e o f h er

d e c e a s ed h u s b an d (By ro n Ty ro n e Carro l l ), ap p eal s fro m th e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f

s u m m ary ju d gm en t i n fav o r o f Pi ed m o n t M ed i cal Care Co rp orat i o n an d Pi ed m o nt

Ho s pi t al i s t Ph y s i ci an s

, L.L.C. 1 Th e Es t at e arg u es t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju d gm en t t o Pi ed m o n t o n t h e b as i s t h at it s m ed i cal -m al p ract i ce cl ai m s were

1 W e refer t o Pi ed m o n t M ed i c a l C a r e Co rp o rat i o n an d Pi ed m o nt Ho s p i t al i s t

Ph y s i ci an s

, L.L.C. co l l ect i v el y as “ Pi ed m o n t .”b arred by t h e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n w h en t h e l i m i t at i o n p eri od was t o l l ed b y frau d

. 2 Fo r

t h e reas o n s s et fo rt h i n

fr a

, we affi rm

.

Vi ewed in t h e li gh t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e n o n-m o v i ng p art y ( i.e.

, t h e Es t at e), 3

t h e reco rd s h o w s t h a t By ro n was h o s p i tal i zed o n Feb ru ary 1 9

, 2 0 1 2

, aft er b ei n g

2 Pi ed m o n t d ev o t es m

u ch o f i t s ap p el l ee bri ef t o arg u in g ag ai n s t an y as s ert i o n

t h at t h e s o -cal l ed “ n ew i n j u ry ” ex cep t i o n ap p li es t o t h is cas e. S ee g en er a l l

y Amu v.

Ba r nes

, 2 8 3 Ga. 5 4 9

, 5 5 1-5 2 (6 6 2 SE2 d 1 1 3 ) (2 0 0 8 ) (“ Th e ‘ n ew i n ju ry ’ ex cep t i o n i s

an at t em p t t o reco nci l e t h e s t at u t e’ s req u irem en t t h at t h e p eri o d o f l i m i t at i on s

co m m en ce o n th e d at e o f t h e p at i en t ’ s ‘ in ju ry ,’ o n t h e o n e h an d, wi t h a reco g n i t i o n,

o n t h e o t her, t h at n ot al l ‘ in ju ri es ’ are n eces s ari l y t h e i m m e d iat e co n s eq u en ce o f a

p h y s i ci an ’ s n eg l i g en t m i s d i ag no s i s

. . . . A p at i en t s u ffers a ‘ new i n ju ry ’ i f h e o r s h e

h a s a r el at i v el y b en i g n an d t reat ab l e precu rs o r m ed i cal co n d i t i o n wh i ch

, a s a

p ro x im at e res u l t o f b ei n g m i s di ag no s ed

, i s l eft u n t reat ed an d su b seq u en t l y d ev el op s

i n t o a m u ch m o re s eri o u s an d d eb i l i t at i n g co n d i ti o n .”). Bu t t h e Es t at e d i d n ot

en u m erat e t h i s as erro r o r p ro vi d e arg um en t or ci t at i o n t o au t ho ri t y in s u p p o rt o f s u ch

a co n t en t io n

. S

ee Ga

. Ca s

. & Su r

. Co

. v. S a l ter ’s In d

u s

. Ser v., In c.

, 3 18 Ga. A p p

. 6 2 0,

6 2 3 (1 ) (7 3 4 SE2 d 4 1 5) (2 0 12 ) (h o l di n g t hat ap p el l an t s ab an d o n ed s p eci fi c arg u m en t

b y fai l i n g t o i n cl u de it i n ap p el l at e b ri ef); S m yr n a Dev. Co

. v. W

h i ten er Lt d

. P’s h i p

, 2 8 0 Ga. Ap p

. 7 8 8

, 7 8 9 -9 0 (1 ) (6 3 5 SE2 d 1 7 3 ) (2 0 06 ) (h o l d i n g t h at ap pel l an t wai v ed

an d ab an do n ed arg u m en t t h at t ri al co u rt ’ s award o f su m m ary ju d g m en t ag ai n s t i t was

erro neo u s

, ev en t h o u g h i t a s s e rt ed i n i t s ap p el l at e b ri ef t h at t here w ere “ ab u n d an t

i s su es o f m at eri al fact ” p recl u d i n g s u m m ary ju d g m e n t

, wh en ap p el l an t d i d n ot

en u m erat e t h e award o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t as erro r). As a res u l t

, we d o n ot ad d res s

an y arg um en t as t o t h e ap p l icab i l i t y o r i n ap p l i cab i l i t y o f t h e “ n ew i n ju ry ” ex cep t i o n

t o t h is cas e. S

ee Ct

. o f Ap p

. R. 2 5 (c) (2 ) (“ An y en u m era t i o n o f e r ro r t h at i s n ot

s u p p ort ed i n t h e b ri ef b y ci t at i o n o f au t h o ri t y o r arg um en t m ay b e d e e m ed

ab an do n ed .”).

3 S ee, e.g

. , Ga d

d i s v. Ch a t

s wo r t h Hea l t h Ca r e Ct r., In c.

, 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p

. 6 1 5

, 6 1 7

(2 ) (6 39 SE2 d 3 9 9 ) (2 0 0 6 ) (“ W e rev i e w t h e g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t de n o v o,

co n st ru i n g t h e ev i d en ce i n fav o r o f t h e n on m o v an t .”).

2t ran s po rt ed b y am bu l an ce fo l lo wi n g co m

p l ai n ts o f ab d o m i n al pai n

. Th ereaft er, fro m

Feb ru ary 1 9 un t i l Feb ru ary 26

, By ro n u nd erwen t a n u m b er o f d i ag n o s t i c t e s t s an d

ex am i n at i o n s b y v ari ou s pro fes s io n al s wi t h i n th e h os p i t al

, b u t h e was n ev er

ad m i n is t ered a CT s can

, des pi t e o n e hav i n g b een o rd ered b y a p h y si ci an o n Feb ru ary

2 1

. On Feb ru ary 2 6

, By ro n

— wh o at th at p oi n t was i n t h e C r i t i c a l Care

Un i t— co n ti n u ed t o expe r ie n c e inc r e a sing a bdom i na l disc om fo rt an d o th er s y m p t o m s

,

an d a CT s can was fi n al l y p er f o r m e d

. Th i s s can rev eal ed wh at ap p eared t o b e

p erfo rat io n o f By

ro n ’ s co l o n

, an d h e u n d erwen t an u rg en t l ap aro t o m y

, d u ri n g wh i ch

d o ct o rs d i s co v ered s t o o l th ro u g h ou t h is ab d o m en

, a p erfo rat i on o f t h e co l o n

, an d

earl y n ecro s i s o f t h e b o wel

. T h en

, d u ri n g a s eco n d ex p l o rat o ry l ap aro t om y o n M arch

1

, 20 1 2

, d o ct o rs d et erm i n ed th at t h e b owel was gan g ren ou s an d n o n v iab l e, an d en d

o f-l ife pro to co l s were d i s cu s s ed wi t h th e fam il y

. By ro n p as s ed away l at er t h at

ev en in g

.

Ly l ah fi l ed a co m

p l ai n t fo r d am ag es ag ai n st Pi ed m o n t an d a n u m ber o f o t h er

d efen d an t s 4 o n Feb ru ary 1 4

, 2 0 1 7

, as s ert in g cl ai m s fo r m ed ical n eg l i g en ce rel at ed to

4 Th e o t h er o ri g i nal l y n am e d d efen d an t s were No rt h At l an t a Su rg i cal

As s oci at es

, P.C.; Lu n g Care Sp eci al is t s

, P.C.; Ru s s el l A. W il s on

, M .D.; an d

Ol u m u y i w a J o s h ua, M .D. No n e o f t h es e d efen d an ts are i n v o l v ed i n t h e c u rren t

ap p eal

. Th es e d efen d an t s w ere ev en t u al l y d i s m i s sed wi t h p reju d i ce wi t h t h e co n s en t

o f t h e Es t at e.

3t h e care By ro n recei ved d u ri n g t h e h o s p it al i zat i o n t h a t e n d ed w it h h i s d eat h

. Th i s

co m p l ai n t w as fi led as a ren ewal o f a p ri o r act i o n t h at w as fi l ed on M ay 3 1

, 2 0 1 6

, an d

d i s m i s s ed wi t h o u t p reju d i ce o n Au g u s t 1 5

, 2 0 1 6

. On M arch 1 5

, 2 0 1 7

, Pi ed m o nt

an s wered a n d fi l ed a m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s t he ren ewal act io n

, co n ten d i n g th at i t was

b arred b y t h e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n

.

Th ereaft er, o n Ap ri l 1 4

, 2 0 1 7

, t h e Es tat e fi l ed an am en d ed co m p l ai n t

, i n wh i ch

i t al l eg ed t h at t h e s t at ut e o f l i m i t at io n i n t h e cas e w as t ol l ed b y frau d o n b eh al f o f

Pi ed m on t

, an d th e Es t at e al s o fi l ed a res p o n s e to Pi e d m o n t ’ s m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s

.

Pi ed m on t t h en fi led an an s wer t o t h e am en d ed co m p l ai n t

, a rep ly t o t he Es t at e’ s

res p o n s e t o i ts m o t i o n t o di s m is s

, an d a m ot i o n t o di sm i s s t he am en d ed co m p l ai n t

.

Th e Es tat e t h en fi l ed a s eco n d am en d ed co m p l ai n t

. Pi ed m o n t

, o n ce ag ai n

, m o v ed to

d i s m i s s t he s eco n d am en d ed co m p l ai n t

.

Th e t r i a l c o u rt s u a s

p o n t e co n v ert ed Pi ed m o n t ’ s m o ti o n t o d i s m i s s i n t o a

m o ti o n fo r s u m

m ary ju d g m en t , o rd eri n g t h e p art i es t o fi l e ev i d en ce p ert i n en t t o t h e

m o ti o n

. Fo l l o wi n g t h e su b m i ss i o n o f ev i d en ce an d a h eari n g o n t h e m ot io n

, 5 t h e t ri al

5 Th e reco rd i n d i cat es t hat a h eari n g was co n d u ct ed o n Au g u s t 2

, 2 0 1 8, an d t h e

n o t i ce o f ap p eal req ues ted th at t h e cl erk o f co u rt “ i n cl u d e al l t ran s cri p t s fro m h eari ng s

h erei n .” Bu t n o t ran s cri p t w as i n cl u d ed wi th t h e reco rd t ran s m i t ted t o t h i s Co u rt

. See

Hi l l v. B d

. o f Reg en t s o f U n i v. S ys

. o f G a.

, 3 4 6 Ga. A p p

. 8 3 0

, 8 3 1 ( 8 1 6 SE2 d 2 9 6 )

(2 0 1 8) (“ If an ap p el l an t des ires t h at a t ran s cri p t be m ad e p art o f t h e reco rd o n ap p eal

,

4co u rt g ran t ed Pi ed m on t ’ s req u es t t h at t h e cas e be d i sm i s s ed

. In d o i ng so

, t h e co u rt

co n cl u d ed t h at n o frau d t o l l ed t h e ru nn i n g o f t he s tat u t e o f l i m i t at i o n an d

, t h u s

, t h e

t i m e l im i t ex p i red p ri o r t o th e fi l i n g o f t h e i n it i al l aws u i t. Th i s ap peal b y t h e Es t at e

fo l l o w s

.

Th e Es t at e arg u es th at t h e t ri al co urt erred i n co n cl u d i n g t h at t h e l i m i t at i o n

p eri o d was n o t t o l l ed b y

frau d o n t h e p art o f Pi ed m o n t . W e d is ag ree.

In act i o ns al l eg i ng m ed i cal m al p ract i ce, t h e cl ai m m u s t b e fi l e d “ w i t h i n t wo

y e a r s aft er t h e d at e o n wh ich an i n ju ry

. . . ari s i n g fro m

a neg l i gen t o r w ro n g fu l act

s h e m u s t s ay s o i n h er n o ti ce o f ap p eal

, hav e t h e tran s cri p t p rep ared at h er o wn

ex p en s e, an d h av e i t fi l ed wi t h t h e t ri al co u rt wi t h i n 30 day s o f t he fi l in g o f t he n o t i ce

o f ap p eal

, u n l es s s h e ob t ai n s an ex t en s i o n o f t i m e fro m t h e t ri al co u rt .”). Nei t h er p art y

h as req u es t ed su p p l em en t at io n o f t he reco rd

, an d it was t h e Es t at e’ s b urd en to en s u re

t h at t h e t ran s cri p t was i n cl u d ed i n t h e reco rd t ran s m i t t ed o n ap p eal

. S ee Qu a r t er ma n

v. Lee

, 29 1 Ga. Ap p

. 6 0 3

, 6 0 3 (6 6 2 SE2 d 2 3 4 ) (2 0 0 8) (“ Th e b urd en i s o n t h e p art y

al l eg in g erro r t o s h o w i t affi rm at i v el y b y t h e reco rd

. ” (p u n ct u at i o n o m i tt ed )); Va u g h n

v. Ro b er t s

, 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p

. 84 0 , 8 4 0 n .5 (6 4 0 SE2 d 29 3 ) (2 0 0 6 ) (“ It is t h e ap p el l an t ’ s

b u rd en t o en s u re th at al l n eces s ary t ran s cri pt s are in cl u d ed in t he reco rd on ap p eal .”).

In t h e ab s en ce of t h e t ran s cri p t

, to t h e ex t en t t h a t a n y ad d i t io n al ev id en ce was

p res en t ed at t he h eari n g

, we p res u m e t h at ev i d en ce s u pp o rt ed t he t ri al co u rt ’ s ru l i n g.

S ee Hen s l e y v. Y o u n g

, 2 7 3 Ga. Ap p

. 6 8 7

, 6 8 7 (6 1 5 SE2 d 7 71 ) (2 0 0 5 ) (“ [W h en ] an

o m i t t ed t ran s cri p t i s n eces s ary fo r t h i s Co u rt t o rev i ew th e al l eg ed erro r, w e a r e

req u i red t o p res u m e t h at t h e l o wer co u r t r u l e d co rrect l y an d t h at t h e ev i d en ce

p res en t ed at t h e h eari n g s u p p o rt ed t h at co u rt ’ s ju d gm en t.”).

5o r o m i s s i o n occu rred .” 6 T h u s

, i n m o s t cas es o f n eg l i g en t t reat m en t o r m i s d i ag n o s i s

,

t h e s t at u t e o f li m i t at i o n fo r m ed i cal m al p ract ice wi ll “ beg i n ru n n i n g at t h e t im e o f t h e

t reat m en t o r m i sd i ag no s is .” 7 Bu t t h e st at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n i s t o l l ed i f “ t h e d efen d an t

o r t h o s e u n d er wh o m h e cl ai m s are g u i l t y o f a frau d b y wh i ch t h e p l ai n t iff h as b een

d eb arred o r d et erred fro m b ri n g i ng an act i o n [.] ” 8 In t h o s e cas es

, t h e s tat u t e o f

l i m i tat i on ru n s fro m t h e ti m e o f t h e d i s co v ery o f t h e frau d

. 9 Im po rt an tl y

, ev en i f t h ere

6 OCGA § 9-3 -7 1 (a); acco r d W i l s o n v. O b s t et r i cs & Gyn eco l o g y o f At l a n t a,

P.C. , 3 0 4 Ga. Ap p . 3 0 0

, 3 0 5 (2 ) (6 9 6 SE2 d 3 3 9 ) (2 0 1 0 ).

7 P o l i s v

. L i n g

, 34 6 Ga. Ap p

. 1 8 5

, 1 87 (8 1 6 SE2 d 9 3 ) (2 0 1 8 ) (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed ); a cco r d McCo r d v. Lee , 2 8 6 Ga. 1 79 , 1 80 (6 8 4 SE2 d 6 5 8 ) (2 0 09 ).

8 OCGA § 9 -3 -9 6 ; a cco r d W i l s on

, 3 04 Ga. A p p

. a t 3 0 5 (2 ). Nei t h er p art y

d i s p u t es t h at OCGA § 9 -3 -9 2 t o l l ed t h e ru n ni n g o f t h e s t at u t e o f l i m it at io n b et ween

t h e t i m e o f By ro n ’ s d eat h on o r ab o ut M arch 1

, 2 0 1 2, an d th e ap p o i n t m en t o f Ly l ah

as ad m i n i s t rat o r o f t h e Es tat e o n J un e 2

, 20 1 4. S ee OCGA § 9 -3 -9 2 (“ Th e t i m e

b et ween t h e d eat h o f a p ers o n an d t h e co m m en cem en t o f rep res en t at i o n u p o n h i s

es t at e

. . . s hal l no t b e co u n t e d a g a i n s t h i s es t at e i n cal cu l at i n g an y l i m i t at i o n

ap p li cab l e to t he b ri n g i n g o f an act io n

, p ro vi d ed t h at s u ch t im e s hal l n o t ex ceed fi v e

y ears [.] ”); Ha r r i s o n v. Ho l s en b eck

, 20 8 Ga. 4 10

, 4 11 (6 7 S E 2 d 3 1 1) (1 9 5 1 )

(“ Li m i t at i o n s t at u t es ru n ag ai n s t es t at es , b u t wh en es t at es are [u ] n rep res en t ed

, s u ch

s t at u tes are t o l l e d b et w een th e d eat h o f a p ers on an d t h e ap p o i n t m en t o f a

rep res en t at i v e

. . . fo r a p eri o d o f fi v e y ears p ro v i d ed rep res en t at i o n i s t ak en wi t h in

t h at p eri o d o f t i m e .” ) ; H a y es v. Hi n es

, 3 4 7 Ga. Ap p. 8 02

, 8 0 7 (2 ) (8 2 1 SE2 d 5 2 )

(2 0 1 8) (p h y s ical p reced en t o n l y ) (s am e).

9 OCGA § 9 -3 -9 6 ; acco r d W i l s o n

, 3 0 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 3 0 5 (2 ); s ee Do v e v. Ty

Co b b Hea l t h ca r e S

ys

., In c.

, 3 0 5 Ga. A p p

. 1 3

, 15 (6 9 9 SE2 d 35 5 ) (2 0 1 0) (“ If a

d efen d an t i s s h o wn t o h av e co m m i t ted a frau d wh i ch d eb arred o r d et erred a p l ai n t i ff

6i s ev i den ce o f frau d

, “ t h e s t at ut e o f l i m i t at i o n i s n o t t ol l ed wh en t h e pl ai n t i ff k n ew al l

fact s neces s ary t o s ho w m al pract i ce b efo re t h e ru nn i n g o f t h e p eri od o f li m i tat i o n .” 1 0

Here, t h e Es t at e arg u es t h at Pi ed m on t ’ s n eg l i g en ce res u lt ed i n By ro n ’ s d eat h

o n M arch 1 , 2 0 1 2 . In t he s eco nd am en d ed co m p l ai n t , t h e Es t at e al l eg es t hat

,

[a] s a res u l t o f t h e s u rg i cal d i s co v ery o f t h e b o wel r u p t u re an d th e

res u lt i n g s i g n i fi can t t i s s u e deat h t hro u g h o u t [By ro n ’ s] s m al l b owel

,

[Pi ed m o n t ] k n ew t h i s i n

ju ry was cau s ed b y an d was t he d i rect res u l t o f

[Pi e d m o n t ’ s ] n eg l i gen ce i n fai l i n g t o p ro p erl y wo rk -u p

, ev al u at e an d

t reat [By ro n ’ s ] bo wel o b s t ru ct i o n d u ri n g t he s ev en d ay s p ri o r t o th e

d i s co v ery o f t h e ru p t u re o n Feb ru ary 2 6 , 2 0 1 2.

Th e Es t at e t h en al l eg es t h at

,

[d ] es p i t e th ei r k n o wl ed g e o f t h e bas i s an d cau s e o f t h e sev ere ru p t u re

i n ju ry an d t i s su e d eat h [By ro n ] ex p eri en ced

, [Pi ed m o n t ] fai l ed t o i n fo rm

t h e Pl ai n t i ff t h at [By ro n ’ s ] s ev ere i n j u ry an d h i s res u l t i n g d eat h were

rel at ed to an d d i rect l y cau s ed b y [Pi ed m o n t ’ s ] neg l i g en t act s an d

o m i s s i o n s i n t h e 7 d ay s p reced i n g t h e d et ect i o n o f t h i s i n ju ry

.

fro m b ri n g in g an act i o n

, t h e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n i s t o l l ed u nt i l t h e frau d i s d i s co v ered

o r reas o n ab l y

s h o ul d h av e b een d i s co v ered .”).

1 0 Do ve

, 3 0 5 Ga. Ap p

. at 1 5 ( p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco r d Hen d r i x v.

S ch recen g os t

, 1 8 3 Ga. Ap p

. 2 0 1

, 20 3 (2 ) (3 5 8 SE2 d 4 8 6 ) (1 9 8 7); s ee Ha mi l t o n v.

Mi t ch el l , 1 65 Ga. Ap p . 7 1 7 , 7 1 8 (3 0 2 SE2 d 5 8 9 ) (1 9 83 ) (h o l d i n g t h at ev i d en ce d id

n o t s h o w t h at p at i en t was p rev en t ed

, b y an y frau d o n p art o f p h y si ci an

, fro m l earn i n g

t ru e fact s co n cern i n g h er b reas t can cer aft er Ap ri l 1 7

, 1 9 7 8

, ev en if h i s al l eg ed frau d

d et erred h er u nt il t h at d at e).

7An d i t i s t h i s f a i l u re t o di s cl o s e wh at th e E s t at e co n t en d s i s a “ cau sal co nn ect i o n ”

b et ween t h e fai l u re t o earl i er ob t ai n a CT s can an d By ro n’s r es u lt i ng i nju ri es t h at

co n st i t u t es t h e “ co n s t ru ct i v e an d act u al frau d an d m i s rep res en t at io n s u ffi ci en t t o t o l l

t h e ap p l i cab l e l i m i t at i o n p eri o d.”

In res po ns e t o Pi ed m on t ’ s m ot i on t o d i sm i s s t h e seco n d am en d ed co m p l ai n t

,

t h e Es t at e arg u ed th at t h e rel ev an t “ i n ju ry o ccu rred o n Feb ru ary 2 6

, 2 0 1 2 ,” an d

, as a

res u l t, “ t h e i nju ry ari si n g o ut o f [Pi ed m o n t ’ s ] n eg l i g en ce o ccu rred at t h at p o i n t an d

t h e l i m i t a t i o n p eri od wo u l d n ot b eg in t o ru n un t i l t hat d at e.” Bu t t h e Es tat e a l s o

m ai n t ai n s t h at t h e “ l i m i t a t i o n peri od di d n o t b eg i n t o ru n u n t i l m u ch l at er, at s o m e

p o i n t a ft er [By ro n ’ s ] d eat h ” d u e t o Pi ed m o n t ’ s al l eg ed fai l ure t o d is cl os e t h e cau s e

o f th e b owel ru p t u re ( i .e.

, t h e al l eg ed del ay in p erfo rm i n g a CT s can ). In o t h er wo rd s

,

t h e Es t at e as s ert s t h at frau d t o l l e d t h e ru n n i n g o f t h e s tat u te o f l im i t at i o n fro m

Feb ru ary 2 6

, 2 01 2

, u n ti l s o m e u n s p eci fi ed d at e. Bu t l i k e t h e t ri al co u rt

, we di s ag ree.

Aft er t h e t ri al co u rt co n v ert ed t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m is s i n t o a m o t i o n fo r s u m m ary

ju d g m en t

, t h e p art i es su b m i tt ed co m p et i n g affi d av i t s

. Th e Es t at e s u b m it t ed affi d av i t s

fro m fam i l y m em

bers

, av erri n g t h at t h ey were n ev er t o l d a CT s can was n eces s ary o r

ap p ro p ri a t e

. Th es e fam i l y m em b ers al s o i n d i cat ed t h at

, i n t h e d ay s aft er a CT s can

an d s urg ery were p erfo rm ed o n Feb ru ary 2 6, 2 0 1 2

, n o o n e ev er i n fo rm ed t h em t h at

8(1 ) t he b o wel ru p t u re an d d am ag e co u l d hav e b een p rev en t ed b y co n d u ct in g an earl i er

CT s can ; (2 ) CT s can s are t he “ g o l d s t an d ard ” fo r d i ag no s i n g s i m i l a r m ed i cal

s i tu at i o n s; (3 ) an earl i er CT s can l i k el y wo u l d hav e rev eal ed a bo wel o b st ru ct i o n p ri o r

t o t h e ex t en s i v e t i ss u e d eat h ; an d (4 ) a reas o n ab l y t i m ed CT s can m ig h t h av e

p rev en ted By ro n’ s d eat h

. An d i n h e r affi d av i t, Ly l ah co n t en d s t hat “ a few m o n t h s ”

aft er By ro n ’ s d eat h ( wh i l e s p eak i n g wi t h an u n nam ed acq u ai n tan ce wh o h ad a

co n nect io n t o t h e h o s p i t al ), sh e was t o l d t h at “ t here was s t il l d i s cu s si o n at th e h o s p i t al

ab o ut w h at h ad h ap p en ed an d wh at h ad g o n e wro ng wi t h [ B y ro n ’ s] t reat m en t .” 1 1 It

was at t h i s po i n t t hat Ly l ah cl ai m s s h e real i zed “ t h ere m i g h t be an i ss u e p ert ai n i n g to

t h e q u al i t y an d st an d ard o f care p ro v i d ed t o [h er] h u s b an d b y h i s at t en d i n g

p h y s i ci an s

. ”

Pi ed m o nt r e s p o n d ed wi t h affi d av i t s fro m v ari o u s m em b ers of By ro n ’ s care

t eam d u ri n g h i s h os p i t al i zat i on

, wh o av erred th at t h ey d i d n ot bel i ev e t he fai l u re to

o b t ai n a CT s can p ri o r t o Feb ru ary 2 6

, 2 0 12

, cau s ed By ro n ’ s i n ju ri es an d t h at t h ey at

n o p oi n t wi t h h el d rel ev an t m ed i cal i n fo rm at i o n fro m o r m i srep res e n t e d an y s u ch

i n fo rm at i o n t o By ro n o r hi s fam i l y

. Pi ed m o n t ’ s cu s t o d i an o f reco rd s al s o av erred t h at

1 1 Th e Es tat e d i d n ot p ro v i d e an affi d av i t fro m t h i s acq u ai nt an ce.

9s h e recei v ed m u lt i p l e req u es t s fro m t h e Es t at e’ s at t o rn ey fo r t h e p ro v i si o n o f m ed i cal

reco rd s , an d t h at t h es e reco rd s were p ro v i d ed wh en req u i red fees were p ai d

.

Gi v e n t h e fo reg oi n g

, t h e Es t at e fai l ed t o al l eg e o r p ro v i d e ev i d en ce o f fact s

s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l i s h frau d t h at wo u l d t o l l t h e ru n n i n g o f t h e s t at u t e o f l im i t at i o n as

o f Feb ru ary 2 6

, 2 0 1 2

. I n d eed

, t h e k ey el em en t fo r s u ch t o l l i n g t o ap p l y i s t h at “ t h e

f r au d m u s t h av e deb arred o r d et erred p l ai n t iff fro m b ri n g i n g t h e s u i t t im el y. ” 1 2 I n

o t h er wo rd s

, t he f

r a u d m u s t “ co n ceal t h e cau s e o f act i o n an d cu t pl ai nt i ff o ff fro m

s u i n g

, p recl u d e h i m

, h i n d er h i m

, s h u t hi m o u t

, o r ex c l u d e h i m to d eb ar hi m fro m

b ri n g i n g s u i t fo r p u rp o s es o f s u s p en s i o n of t h e ru n n i n g of t h e s t at ut e o f li m i tat i o n .” 1 3

An d w h en t h ere i s “ a co n fi d en ti al rel at io n s hi p an d

. . . a d u ty t o d i s cl o s e o r t h e ri g ht

i n t h e p l ai n t i ff t o ex p ect fu l l co m m u n i cat i o n o f t h e fact s

, co n ceal m en t p er s e o r

1 2 Ch a rt er Pea ch

f o rd Beh a vi o r a l Hea l t h S

ys

. v. Ko h o ut

, 2 3 3 Ga. Ap p

. 4 5 2

, 4 5 7

(c) (5 0 4 SE2 d 5 1 4 ) (1 9 98 ); s ee B r a y v. Di xo n

, 1 76 Ga. Ap p

. 8 9 5

, 8 9 6 (3 3 8 SE2 d 8 7 2 )

(1 9 8 5) (“ OCGA § 9 -3 -9 6 st o ps t h e l i m i t at i o n i f d efen d an t i s g u i l t y o f frau d b y wh i ch

p l ai n t i ff i s d eb arred o r d et erred fro m b ri n g i n g an act i o n .”).

1 3 Ko h o u t

, 23 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 5 7 -5 8 (c); s ee Ka n e v. S h ou p

, 2 6 0 Ga. Ap p

. 7 2 3,

7 2 6 (2 ) (5 8 0 SE2 d 5 5 5 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (“ [W ] h i l e a p h y s i ci an h as a fi d u ci ary d u t y t o i n fo rm

h i s p at i en t o f an y in

ju ry o r n eg l i g en t m i s treat m en t

, t o es t ab li s h frau d a p lai n t i ff m u s t

p re s e n t e v i d en ce t hat t h e p hy s i ci an k n ew t h at t h e p lai n t i ff was i nju red i n t h e way s

p l ai n t i ff co n t en d s ; th at t h e p h y si ci an k n ew t h at h i s v i o l at i o n s o f t h e s t an d ard o f care

cau s ed s uch i n

ju ri es ; an d t h at h e i n t en t i o n al l y co nceal ed s u ch fact .”).

10inte nt io n al s i l en ce am o u n t s t o act u al frau d t hat t o l ls t h e s t at u t e.” 1 4 A p h y s i cia n

- pa tie nt

rel at i o n s h i p i s a cl as si c co n fi d en t i al rel at i on s h i p

, an d “ si l en ce o r fai l u re t o d i s cl o s e

wh at sh o u l d b e s ai d o r d i s cl o sed can am o u n t t o frau d .” 1 5 Nev ert h el es s

, t h ere m u s t b e

ev i d en ce t hat “ t here was an i n t en t t o co n ceal b y s i l en ce o r t h at t h e rep res en t at i o n s

were fal s e wh en m ad e an d were i n ten d ed t o m i sl ead .” 1 6

In t h i s cas e, t h ere i s n o ev i d en ce t hat an y m i s rep res en t a t i o n s w ere m ad e to

By ro n o r h i s fam i l y ; an d as t o t h e i s s u e o f s il en ce, th ere i s n o ev i d en ce o r s u g g es t i o n

t h at t h e Pi ed m o n t act o rs b el iev ed o r were aware t hat t h e fai l u re t o o bt ai n an earl i er

CT scan res u l t ed i n Byr o n ’ s d eat h

, as t h e Es t at e al l eg es

. Th u s, wh i l e t h e fai l u re to

1 4 Ko h o u t

, 2 3 3 Ga. Ap p . at 4 5 8 (c).

1 5 Ko h ou t

, 2 3 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 5 8 (c) (p un ct u at i o n o m it t ed ); s ee S h ved v. Da l

y

, 1 7 4 G a. Ap p. 2 0 9

, 2 1 0 (3 2 9 SE2 d 5 3 6 ) (1 9 8 5 ) (“ [W h en ] p ers on s s u s t ai n t o ward

an o th er a rel at i o n o f t ru s t an d co n fi d en ce, t h ei r s i l en ce wh en t h ey o u g h t t o s p eak i s

as m u ch a frau d i n l aw a s a n a c t u al affi rm at i v e fal se rep res en t at io n .” (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed )); W

a d e v. Th oma s vi l l e Or t h op ed i c Cl i ni c, In c.

, 1 6 7 G a. Ap p

. 2 78 , 2 8 1 (2 )

(3 0 6 SE2 d 3 6 6 ) (1 9 8 3 ) (s am e).

1 6 Ko h o u t

, 2 3 3 Ga. Ap p. at 4 58 (c); s ee Hu n t er

, Ma cl ea n

, Exl ey & Du n n

, P.C.

v. Fr ame

, 2 6 9 Ga. 8 4 4

, 8 4 9 (1 ) (5 0 7 SE2 d 4 1 1 ) (1 9 9 8 ) (“ A co nfi d en t i al rel at i o n s h ip

b et ween t h e p art i es i m

po s es a g reat er d u ty o n a d efen d an t t o rev eal wh at s h o u l d b e

rev eal ed

, an d a les sen ed du t y on t h e p a r t o f a pl ai n t i ff t o d is co v er wh at s h o u l d b e

d i s co v erab l e t h ro u g h t he ex erci s e o f ord i n ary care. Bu t t h e frau d i t s el f— t h e

d efen d an t ’ s i n t en t i o n to co n ceal o r d ecei v e— s ti l l m u s t b e es t ab l i s h ed

, as m

u s t t h e

p l ai n t i ff’ s d et erren ce fro m b ri n g i n g s u i t .”).

11reco g n ize t h i s i s arg u ab l y ev i den c e o f n e g l ig en ce, i t i s n o t ev i den ce o f frau d t h at

wo u l d b e s u ffi ci en t to t o ll t h e st at u t e o f l i m i t at io n

. 1 7 Fu rt herm o re, aft er By ro n’ s d eat h,

1 7 S ee W aycr o s s Ur o lo gy Cl i n i c, P.C. v. Jo h ns o n

, 2 7 9 Ga. Ap p

. 1 9 5

, 1 9 9 (6 3 0

SE2 d 8 0 7 ) ( 2 0 0 6 ) (“ At b es t t h e t es t i m o ny o f [p l ai nt i ff’ s ] ex p ert creat es an i s s u e o f

fact as to wh et h er [t h e d o ct or] was n eg l ig en t

. No t h in g i n t h e reco rd refl ect s t h at [t h e

d o ct o r] k n ew at an y t i m e t h a t h i s t reat m en t o r ad v i ce t o [t h e p l ai n t i ff] was i n erro r,

n o r is t h ere an y ev i d en ce t h at he frau d u l e n t l y w i t hh el d s u ch i n fo rm at i o n fro m [t h e

p l ai n t i ff] .”); Ro wel l v. McCu e

, 1 8 8 Ga. Ap p

. 5 2 8

, 5 3 0 (3 7 3 SE2 d 2 43 ) (1 9 8 8 )

(reject i ng as s ert i o n o f frau d wh en t here was n o ev i d en ce b y wh i ch t o i nfer t h at d o ct o r

“ h ad an y k n o wl ed g e o f i m p ro p er co n d u ct on h i s p art o r t h at h e t ri ed t o co v er u p s u ch

co n du ct i n an y way ”); S h ved

, 1 7 4 Ga. Ap p. at 2 1 0 (h o l d i n g t h a t t h ere was n o

ev i d en ce t h at ap p el l ees k n o wi ng l y fai l ed t o i nfo rm p at ien t th at h e recei v ed ex ces s i v e

rad i at i o n d u e t o ari t h m et i c m is cal cu l at i on s an d o v erl ap p i n g areas o f rad i at i o n wh en

“ n o t h i n g wh at s o ev er

. . . s ug g es t [s ] t h at t h es e m i s t ak es w ere di s co v ered b y ap p el l ees

p ri o r t o t h e i n s t i t u t i on o f th e i n s t an t l aws u i t ,” an d “ [w] h i le t h is fai l u r e m a y b e

ev i d en ce o f n eg l i g en ce, i t i s n o t ev i d en ce o f frau d w hi ch wo u ld to l l t h e s t at u t e o f

l i m i tat i on ”). Cf

. Ma cDo wel l v. Ga l la n t

, 3 4 4 Ga. Ap p

. 8 5 6

, 8 6 0 (8 1 1 S E 2 d 5 1 3 )

(2 0 1 8) (h o l d i n g t h at do ct o r’ s ad m i t t ed fai l u re t o i n fo rm p at ien t t h at h er d en t al

i m p l an t s were fai li n g d u e t o i m p ro p er p l acem e nt

, d es p i t e m ul t i p l e fo l l o wu p v i s i t s

,

am ou n t ed t o frau d u l en t co nceal m en t t h at t o ll ed s t at u te o f l i m i t at i o n ); W i l s on

, 3 0 4 Ga.

Ap p

. at 3 0 6-0 8 (2 ) (h o l d i n g t h at t h ere w as a q u e s t i o n of fact as t o frau d t hat t o l l ed

s t at u te o f l i m i t at i o n wh en p aren t s were n ev er t o l d b y d o ct o rs t h at t h e i r d a u g h t er’ s

d eat h at b i rt h res u l t ed fro m i n ju ri es th at were cau s ed b y m ed i cal erro rs ); Lo r en t z so n

v

. Ro wel l

, 1 7 1 Ga. A p p. 8 2 1

, 8 2 6 (3 2 1 SE2 d 3 4 1) (1 98 4 ) (h o l di n g t h at q u e s t i o n o f

fact rem ai n ed o n wh et h er frau d t o l l ed s t at u t e o f l im i t at io n w hen t h ere was ev i d en ce

t h an p l ai n t i ff h ad as k ed do ct o r i f p res cri p ti o n d ru g was t h e cau s e of h is ey e p ro b l em s

an d do ct o r h ad ev ad ed di s cu s s i n g s am e); Lea g a n v. Levi n e

, 1 5 8 Ga. Ap p

. 2 9 3

, 2 9 3 -9 4

(1 ) (2 7 9 SE2 d 7 4 1) (1 9 8 1 ) (h o ld i n g t h at qu es t i o n of fact rem ai n ed on wh et h er frau d

t o l l ed st at u t e o f l i m it at i o n wh en ev i d en ce co n fl i ct ed on wh et h er p at ien t was t o l d t h at

h er co m pl i cat i o n s were rel at ed t o an earl i er p erfo rm ed p ro ced u re an d t h at s h e d i d n ot

l earn u nt i l y ears l at er t h an t h e earl i er p ro ced u re h ad re s u l ted i n h er b o wel s b ei n g

b u rn ed ).

12t h ere i s n o al l eg at i o n o f o r ev i d en ce t h at Pi ed m o n t at t em p t ed t o co n cea l a n yt h i n g

fro m t h e Es t at e wh en Pi ed m o n t p ro v id ed th e Es t at e wi t h t he r e q u e s t e d m ed i cal

reco rd s

, an d t h ere are n o al l eg at i o ns t h at Pi ed m on t i n an y way al t ered t h o s e reco rd s

. 1 8

In d eed

, th e m ed i cal reco rd s were s u b s eq uen t l y rev i ewed b y t h e Es t at e’ s ex p ert

, wh o

reach ed h i s co n cl u s i o n t h at Pi ed m o n t was n eg li gen t o n M a y 1 3

, 2 0 1 6

, bef o r e t h e

s t at u te o f l i m i tat i o n ex p i red

.

Acco rd i ng l y

, as s u m i n g t h at t h e rel ev an t i nju ry o ccu rred o n Feb ru ary 2 6

, 2 0 1 2,

as t h e Es tat e al l eg es

, th e s t at u t e o f l i m i t at i o n b eg an ru n n i n g at th at t i m e an d di d s o fo r

fi ve day s

, u n t i l M arch 1

, 2 0 1 2

, w h en By ro n d i ed

. Th ereaft er, t h e l im it at i o n p eri o d

was t o l l ed u n t i l L y l ah was ap po i n t ed as ad m i n i s trat o r o f t h e Es t at e on Ju n e 1, 2 0 1 4

. 1 9

1 8 S ee S h ved

, 17 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 2 1 0 (h o ld i n g t h at ap p el l an t d i d n o t es t ab l i s h

frau du l en t co n ceal m en t w h en

, i n t er a li a

, t h ere wa s n o e v i d en ce t h at ap p el l ees

at t em p t ed t o co n ceal neg l i g en ce). Cf .Qu a t t l eb a u m v. Co wa r t

, 1 82 Ga. Ap p

. 4 7 3

, 4 7 4

(2 ) (3 56 SE2 d 9 1 ) (1 9 87 ) (h o l d i n g t h at t h ere was q u es t i on o f fact as t o frau d t o t o l l

s t at u te o f l i m i tat i o n wh en “ reco rd s u p p o rt [ed ] a reas on ab l e i n feren ce t h at ap p el l an t

k n o wi n g l y at t em

p t ed t o co n ceal h i s neg l i g en ce t h ro u g h o u t h i s p o st -J an u ary 2

, 1 9 7 4

rel at i o n s h i p wi t h ap p el l ees ”); S u t l i ve v. Ha ckn ey

, 1 6 4 Ga. A p p

. 7 4 0

, 74 2 (2 9 7 SE2 d

5 1 5 ) (1 9 82 ) (h o l d i n g t h a t t h e re was a q u es t i o n o f fact as t o frau d to to l l s t at u t e o f

l i m i tat i on wh en t h ere was ev i d en ce t h at co u l d s u g g es t k no wl ed g e o f n eg l i g en ce an d

an at t em pt t o co n ceal s am e b y p erfo rm i n g l at er p ro ced u res ), o ver ru l ed o n o t h er

g r o u nd s b y Hu n ter

, Ma cl ea n

, Exl ey & Du n n , 2 6 9 Ga. 8 4 4

.

1 9 S ee OCGA § 9 -3 -9 2 (“ Th e t im e b et ween t h e d eat h o f a p ers on an d t h e

co m m en cem en t o f rep res en t at io n u p o n h i s es t at e or bet ween t h e t erm i n at i o n o f o n e

ad m i n is t rat i o n a n d t h e co m m en cem en t o f an o th er s h al l n o t b e co u nt ed ag ai n s t h i s

13Th u s, t h e Es t at e h ad un t i l Ju n e 1

, 2 0 16

, m in u s fi v e d ay s

, i n w h i c h t o fi l e

s u i t

— m ean i n g t h at t h e s tat u t e o f li m i t at i o n ex p i red o n M ay 2 7

, 2 01 6

, an d t h e act i o n

fi led on M ay

3 1 , 2 0 1 6

, was t i m e-b arred

. 2 0

es t at e i n cal cu lat i n g an y l i m i t at i o n ap p l i cab l e t o t h e bri n g in g o f an act i on

, p ro v i d ed

t h at su ch t i m e s h a l l n o t ex ceed fi v e y ears

. At t h e ex p i rat io n o f t h e fi v e y ears t h e

l i m i tat i on s h al l co m

m en ce, ev en i f t h e cau se o f act io n accru ed aft er t h e p ers o n ’ s

d eat h .”); Go o d

ma n v. S a t i l l a Hea lt h S

er vs

., In c.

, 2 9 0 Ga. Ap p

. 6, 9 (6 5 8 SE2 d 7 9 2 )

(2 0 0 8) (ex p l ai ni n g t h at s t at u t e of l i m i t at i o n w as t o l l ed o n m ed i cal -m al p ract i ce cl ai m

u n t i l t h e ap p o i n t m en t o f es t at e’ s rep res en t at i ve).

2 0 W e reject t h e Es t a t e ’s as sert i o n t h at u nd er OCGA § 5 1-4 -5

, t h e s t at u t e o f

l i m i tat i on d i d n o t b eg i n t o ru n u n t i l t h e d at e o f By ro n ’ s d eat h

. Th e Es t at e p ro v i d es n o

c i t a t i o n t o au t h o ri t y i n su p po rt o f t h i s cl ai m

, an d t h e pl ai n l an g uag e o f t h e s t a t u t e

s p eak s t o w h o m ay b r i n g a c au s e o f act i on an d reco v er o n b eh al f o f a d eceas ed

i n d i v i d u al

, an d wh at d am ag es m ay b e reco v ered

. S ee OCGA § 5 1-4 -5 (a) (“ W h en

t h ere is n o p ers o n en t i t l ed t o bri n g an act i o n fo r th e wro ng fu l d eat h o f a d eced en t

u n d er Co d e Sect i o n 5 1 -4 -2 o r 5 1 -4 -4 , t he ad m i n i s trat o r o r ex ecu t o r o f t he d eced en t

m ay b ri n g an act i o n fo r an d m a y reco v er an d h o ld t h e am o u nt reco v ered fo r t h e

b en efi t o f t h e n ex t o f k in

. In an y s u ch cas e t h e am o u nt of t h e reco v ery s hal l b e t h e fu l l

v al u e o f t h e l i fe o f t h e d eced en t .”); OCGA § 5 1

- 4-5 (b ) (“ W h en d eat h o f a h u m an

b ei n g res u l t s fro m a cri m e o r fro m cri m i n al o r o t h er n e g l ig en ce, t h e p ers o n al

rep res en t at i v e o f t h e d eceas ed p ers o n s h al l b e en t i t l ed t o reco v er fo r t h e fu n eral

,

m ed i cal

, an d o t h er n eces s ary ex p en s es res u l t in g fro m t h e i n ju ry an d d eat h o f t h e

d eceas ed p ers o n .”). In d eed

, t h e Es t at e s eek s t o reco v er “ d am ag es fo r t h e ex t rem e

co n sci o u s p ai n

, s u fferi ng an d m en t al an g ui s h [By ro n ] ex p eri en ced p ri o r t o h i s d eat h ”

an d “ t h e ex p en s es o f h i s l as t i l l n es s ” i n ad d it i on t o h is fu n eral an d rel at ed ex p en s es

, al l du e t o al l eg ed m ed i cal m al pract i ce. T h i s i s n o t

, t h en

, a w ro n g fu l d eat h cas e. Cf

. W i l l ia ms v. Ga

. Dep ’t o

f Hu ma n Res

. , 2 7 2 Ga. 6 2 4, 6 2 6 (5 3 2 SE2 d 4 0 1 ) (2 0 0 0 ) (“ [A]

cl ai m fo r wro n g fu l deat h do es no t accru e u n t i l t h e d eat h o ccu rs .”); Lo vet t v. Ga r vi n

, 2 3 2 Ga. 7 4 7

, 7 4 8 (2 0 8 SE2 d 8 3 8 ) (1 9 7 4) (h o l d i n g t h at b ecau se wro ng fu l -d eat h cl ai m

i s fo r in ju ry s u s tai n ed b y s u rv i vo r as a res u lt o f t he d eat h

, n o t fo r th e i n ju ry s u ffered

b y t h e d eceas ed

, h u sb an d h ad cl ai m t h at accru ed at t im e o f wi fe’ s d eat h

, n o t at t i m e

14Fo r al l t h es e reas o ns

, we affi rm t h e tri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f su m m ary j u d gm en t to

Pi ed m on t

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Go b ei l

a n d Ho d g es , JJ., co n cu r

.

i n ju ri es were i nfl ict ed ).

15