I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO. 2 0 0 5 - I A- 0 0 2 8 6 - S CT J OS EP H A. P ROL I , M . D.
v. M EL I N DA H AT H O RN AN D JAN ICE DAVIS

, I ND I V I DU A L L Y A ND ON

B EHA L F

OF T HE W RONGF UL DE

AT H BENE FICI

AR I ESOF TRES S I E D. BEDW

ELL , DECEAS

ED
D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 01/ 19/ 2005 T RI AL J UDGE : HON. BI L L Y J OE L ANDR UM COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: J ONES COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT ATTO RN EYS FOR A PP ELLAN T: R O M N E Y H A S T IN G S E N T R E K IN RY AN J EFF REY M I TCH ELL AT T OR NE Y F OR AP P E L L E E S : RO S AL I ND HAY DE N J OR DAN NATURE OF THE CAS E: CI VI L - M EDI CAL M ALP RACTI CE D I SPO SI T I O N : A FFIRM E D A N D R E M A N D E D - 04/ 27/ 2006 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D:

EN BA NC. EAS LEY, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: P ROCE DURAL HI S TORY ¶1. T hi s i nt er l ocut or yappea l conce r ns w hen pr opers ervi ce i s compl et e fort he medi cal
m alpra cti ce n o ti ce req u ir em en t pu rsua n t t o M iss. C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1-3 6 (15 ) (R ev . 2 0 0 3 ). M el i nda H athor n and J ani ce D av i s ( col l ect i vel yknow n as “H athor n”) fi l ed a medi cal
m a l p r a c t i c e c a s e i n t h e C i r c u i tC o u r to f t h e S e c o n d J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c to f J o n e s C o u n t y,

### 2

M iss iss ip p i, ag a in st D r. Jo se p h A . P ro li, in d iv id u a llya n d o n b e h a lf o f th e w ro n g f

u l d e a th benef i ci ar i es of Tre s s i e D
. B edw el l , dece as ed. ¶2. H athor n al l eged thatB edw el l s uffe r ed a mi n o r strok e o n M ay1, 2002, and w as admi t t ed t o Sout h C entr al R egi onal M edi cal C ent er . O n M ay 2, 2002, D r . Pr ol i per for m ed
a tra n se so p h a g e a l ele c tro c a rd io g ra m o n B e d w e ll. T h e re a f ter , B e d w e ll w a s tra n sf e rre d to For r es tG en era l H os pi t al foraddi t i onal s ur geryon heres ophagus
. O n M ay18, 2002, B edw el l di ed. ¶3. H athor n admi t t ed i n her br i ef t hat t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons began t o run on M ay18, 2002, t he dat e of Bedw el l ’ s death, and i t w as s et t o expi r e on M ay 18, 2004. O n A pr i l 22, 2004, H athor n m ai l ed a c er t i fi ed l et t ert o D r . Pr ol i i nfor m i ng hi m t hatcouns el w as r et ai ned t o i nves t i gat e B edw el l ’ s al l eged w r ongful death. D r . Pr ol i r ece i ved t he not i ce on A pr i l 30, 2004. A ft ert he i ni t i al not i ce, H athor n fi l ed a compl ai nt on J une 24, 2004. T he compl ai nt al l eged thatD r . Pr ol i per for at ed B edw el l ’ s es ophagus dur i ng t he M ay2nd pr ocedur e w hi ch pr oxi m at el ycaus ed orcontr i but ed t o herdeath. D r . Pr ol i fi l ed an a ns w ert o t he compl ai nt
as s er t i ng t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons pur s uant t o M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15) as a def ens e. ¶ 4
. D r. P ro li f

iled a m o tio n to d ism iss
. H e a rg u e d th a t (1 ) H a th o rn ’s c o m p lain t f a iled to compl yw i t h t he appl i cabl e t w o- y ear s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons and t he 60 dayext ens i on per i od pu r s ua ntt o M i s s . Code A nn . §§ 15
- 1- 36 ( 2) a nd 15
- 1- 36 ( 15 ) , a nd ( 2) pu r s ua nt t o M
. R. C. P. 5 s er vi ce bym ail is c o m p l et e upon mai l i ng, w hi ch occ ur r ed on A pr i l 22, 2004. T he tr i al
cou rtcon du ct ed a h eari ng and l at er i ssued an o rd e r d e n y i ng D r. P rol i ’s m oti on t o d i sm i ss.

### 3

T h e tri al co u rtfo u n d the ac ti o n w as n o t ti m e-b arred b y the statu te o f li m it ati o n s b ec au se D r. Pr ol i r ece i ved the not i ce vi a cer t i fi ed m ai l on A pr i l 30, 2004. Fol l ow i ng t hi s rul i ng, t he tr i al
cour tgr ant ed D r . Pr ol i ’ s m ot i on forcert i fi cat i on fori nt er l ocut or yappea l and s t ayof pr ocee di ngs . T hi s C our tgr ant ed D r . Pr ol i ’ s pet i t i on fori nt er l ocut or yappea l
. O n appea l , t he i ssue r ai sed i s: W hethert he s i xt y day not i ce r equi r ement of M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36 ( 15) i s governed byM
. R
. C
. P. 5 t her eby m aki ng s ervi ce of t he not i ce c om pl et e upon m ai l i ng. DI S CU S S I ON A
. C om pl et i on of N ot i ce. ¶5. P ri o r to fi l i ng s ui t , w r i t t en not i ce i s r equi r ed forl egal act i ons agai ns theal th ca re p ro v id e rs f

o r a lleg e d n e g lig e n c e . M iss
. C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1 -3 6 . T h e sta tu te p ro v id e s, in p a rt, f o r a tw o -y e a r sta tu te o f lim itatio n s f ro m th e d a te th e a lleg e d a c t, om iss io n o r n e g lec t sh a ll
orw i t h r eas onabl e di l i gence m i ght have been fi r s t know n or di s cover ed. M i s s . C ode A nn. § 1 5-1-36(2) pr ov i des: ( 2) Foranycl ai m acc rui ng on or af t er Jul y 1, 1998 , and excep t as ot herw i se p ro v id e d in th is s e c tio n , no cl ai m i n t ort m ay be brought agai nst a l i cens ed phy s i ci an , os t eopath, dent i s t , hos pi t al , i ns t i tut i on fort he age d ori nfi r m , nur s e, p h arm ac ist , p o d iat ri st, o p tom etri st or ch ir o p rac tor f or i nj ur i e s or w r ong f

ul deat h ari s i ng out of t he cours e of m edi cal , s urgi cal or ot her prof es s i onal ser v ices u n less it is fil ed w it h in tw o (2) y ea rs fro m th e d a te th e a ll eg ed a ct, om i s s i on or negl ect s hal l or w i t h reas onabl e di l i gence m i ght have been f i rs t know n or di s cover ed , and, exce pt as des cr i bed i n par agr aphs ( a) and ( b) o f th is s u b se c tio n , in n o e v e n t m o re th a n se v e n (7 ) y e a rs a f ter th e a lleg e d a c t, o m is s io n o r n e g le c t o c c u rr e d
. . . .

### 4

M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 2) ( emphasi s added)
. T hi s not i ce s t atut e al s o has a pr ovi s i on t hat ext ends t he t i m e fort he comm ence m ent of t he act i on for 60 day s fr om t he dat e of s ervi ce of t he not i ce if

th e n o tice is s e rv e d w ith in 6 0 d a y s p rio r to th e e x p ira tio n d a te o f th e a p p lica b le st atute of l i m i t at i on s. M i ss. C od e A nn . § 1 5-1-36(15) provides: (15 ) N o act i on based upon t he heal t h care provi der' s p ro fessi onal n eg li g en ce m a y b e b eg u n u n less th e d efe n d a n t h a s b ee n g iven a t l ea st si x ty (6 0 ) d a y s ' p r io r w r it te n n o ti c e o f t h e i n t e n t i o n to b e g in th e a c ti o n . No par t i cul arfo rm o f not i ce i s r equi r ed, buti ts hal l not i fyt he def endantof the leg a l b a sis o f

th e c la im a n d th e typ e o f lo ss su sta in e d , inc lu d in g w ith s p e c if ic ity th e n a tu re o f

th e in ju ri e s s u f

f e re d
. If th e n o tic e is s e r v e d w ith in s ix ty ( 60) day s pri or t o t he exp i rat i on of t he appl i cabl e s t at ut e of l i m i t at i ons, t he t i m e f

or the com m encem ent of t he act i on shal l be exte nded s i x t y ( 60) day s f

rom t he s ervi ce of t he not i ce f or s ai d heal t h care provi ders a n d o th e r s . T hi s s ubs ect i on s hal l notbe appl i cabl e w i t h r es pectt o any defe ndant w hos e name i s unknow n t o t he pl ai nt i ff at t he t i m e of f il ing the compl ai ntand w ho i s i dent i fi ed ther ei n bya fi ct i t i ous name. M iss. C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1-3 6 (15 ) (em p h asis ad d ed ). ¶6. T he t r i al cour t det erm i ned t hat t he not i ce w as s erved upon D r . Pr ol i w hen he r ece i ved the c erti fied m ail n o ti ce o n A p ri l 30 , 2 0 0 4 , p u rs u an t t o M
. R
. C
. P
. 4 (c)(5). T h e tri al co u rt hel d: A c c o rd in g to M R C P 4 (c )(5 ) c e rtifie d m a il “ sh a ll b e d e e m e d c o m p lete as of t he dat e of del i very as evi dence d byt he r etur n r ece i pt . . . . ” See M RCP 4. T hi s C our tfi nds t hat M R C P 5( b) i s appl i cabl e forr egul arU ni t ed St at es f ir s t - c l a s s m a il p o s ta g e p re p a id , n o t f o r c e rt if ie d m a il. See M R C P 5 . T h is C our t fi nds no r eas on w hy t he dat e of de l i veryfora not i ce l et t ers entcert i fi ed m ai l w ould b e d iffer entfr om t he dat e of de l i veryof a s um m ons s entby c e rtifie d m a il. T h e C o u rtfin d s tha t th e n o ti ce let ter w as se n t ce rt if ie d m ail return r ece i ptr eques t ed, and thatt he D efe ndant r ece i ved the l et t eron A pr i l 30, 2004, as evi denced u p o n t he r etur n r ece i pt . T hus , t he Pl ai nt i ff’ s C om pl ai nti s not t i m e- barr ed.

### 5

¶7. D r . Pr ol i ar gues t hat t he t r i al cour t err ed by deny i ng hi s m ot i on t o di s m i s s . T he tr i al
c o u rt d e ter m in e d th a t (1 ) se rv ice o f th e n o tice w a s c o m p lete w h e n D r. P ro li r ece i ved t he not i ce l et t eron A pr i l 30, 2004, pur s uant t o M
. R
. C
. P. 4( c) ( 5) , and ( 2) bas ed upon the dat e of
s er vi ce of

t he not i ce, H athor n’ s s ui tw as not t i m e- barr ed. D r . Pr ol i ar gues t hats ervi ce of t he
no t i ce w as com plet e on t he d at e i tw as m ai l ed , A p ri l 22 , 2 0 0 4 , p u rsua n t to M
. R
. C
. P
. 5
. D r. Pr ol i al s o r el i es upon B r ocato v. Mis s is s i ppiP ublis hers Cor

p. , 50 3 S o. 2d 24 1, 24 3 (M i ss. 1 9 8 7 ), w h ich w ill b e d isc u ss e d in f u rth e r de tail be lo w . B a se d u p o n th e A p ril 2 2 , 2 0 0 4 , d a te
o f c o m p letio n o f

th e se rv ice o f

th e n o tice , D r. P ro li a ss e rts tha t H a th o rn f a iled to tim e lyf

ile h e r c o m p la in t p u rs u a n t to th e s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s . See M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36. ¶ 8
. In o rd e r to d e ter m in e w h e th e r H a th o rn ’s su it is b a rre d b yth e sta tu te o f lim itatio n s, th is C o u r t f i r s t mus t d e t e r mi n e whe t h e r M
. R. C. P. 4 ( c ) ( 5 ) o r M
. R. C. P. 5 i s c o n t r o l l i ng for t he
s e rv ic e o f

th e n o tic e re q u ir e d b yM is s . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1 -3 6
. ¶9. M
. R
. C
. P. 4 ( c) ( 5) conce r ns s er vi ce of a s um m ons and compl ai nt by cert i fi ed m ai l on a person o uts i de the Stat e and provides:

In a d d itio n to s e rv ic e b y a n y o th e r m e th o d p ro v id e d b y th is ru le , a su m m ons m ay be s erve d on a p ers on outs i de t hi s s t at e b ys e n d i n g a c o py o f t h e s u m m o n s a n d o f

t h e c o m p l a i n tt o t h e p e r s o n t o b e s e r v e d b y cer t i f i ed m ai l , ret urn rece i pt reques t ed
. W her e t he defenda nt i s a natur al per s on, t he envel ope cont ai ni ng t he sum m ons and com pl ai nts hal l be mar ked " r es t r i ct ed deli very . " S er v ice b y th is m eth o d sh a ll b e d ee m ed co m p lete a s o f th e d a te of de l i ve r y as e vi de nc e d by t he r e t ur n r e c e i pt or by t he r e t ur ne d e nve l ope m a r k e d " R e fu s e d ." M
. R
. C
. P. 4 ( c) ( 5) ( emphasi s added)
. M
. R
. C
. P. 5 conce r ns s ervi ce and fi l i ng of pl eadi ngs and otherpap ers and provides:

### 6

(a ) E xcep t as other w i se provided i n these rules , every order requi red b y its t erm s t o b e ser ved , every pleadi ng subsequ ent t o the ori ginal com plai nt unl ess t he courtot herw i s e or der s beca us e of nu m er ous defe ndant s , everypaper relati n g to d isc o v e ry req u ir ed to b e se rve d u p o n a p artyu n less the c o u rt ot herw i s e or der s , every w r i t t en m ot i on ot her t han one w hi ch m aybe hea r d ex p a rt e , and every w ri t t en not i ce , ap p e a ra n c e , d e m a n d , o f f e r o f ju d g m e n t, des i gnat i on of r ecor d on appea l and s i m i l arpapers hal l be s erved upon ea ch o f th e p a rt ie s .... (b) Servi ce by m ai l i s com pl et e upon m ai l i ng. M
. R
. C
. P
. 5 (em p h asis ad d ed ). ¶10. T hi s C our taddr es s ed a s t atut e w i t h a not i ce r equi r ementi n B ro c a to . I n B ro c a to , a lib e l ac tio n , this C o u rt a n a ly z e d M iss C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1 -3 5 , w h ich re q u ire s a lib e l ac tio n to be fi l ed w i t hin o n e y earaft ert he ca us e of a ct i on acc rues , and M i s s . C ode A nn. § 95- 1- 5,
w h ich re q u ire s a p lain tiff to g iv e ten d a y s n o tice to th e d e f e n d a n t b e f

o re a lib e l ac tio n is br ought
. T hi s C our t , i n B ro c a to , 503 So. 2d at243, hel d: B eca us e of t he pecul i ar fac tual s i tuat i on i nvol ved i n t hi s cas e, i ti s es s ent i al for t he C our tt o det er m i ne w hat act i on cons t i t ut es t he s ervi ng of not i ce under § 9 5- 1- 5, w hi c h i s s i l e nt r e ga r di ng ho w not i c e i s t o be s e r ve d. R ul e 5 o f t he M i s s i s s i ppi R ul es of

C i vi l P roce dure i s general l y ut i l i zed af t er a s ui t has b e e n fi le d . T h e o f

f icia l c o m m e n ts to R u le 5 sta te in p a rt, "T h is ru le p re s u p p o s e s th a t th e c o u rt h a s a lr e a d y g a in e d ju ri s d ic tio n o v e r t h e p a rt ie s ." H ow e ve r , t hi s C our t f i nds t he m e c hani c s of

R ul e 5 may al s o be us e d i n a si tuat i on s uc h as t he one at bar i n w hi c h not i c e i s r e qui red as a pr e l i m i nar y s t e p t o f

i l i ng a l aw s ui t . Ther e f or e , t hi s C our t hol ds t hat t he n oti ce req u i rem en ts of § 95 -1- 5 sh ou l d fol l ow the R u l e 5 o u tl i n es. (E m p h a s is a d d e d ). ¶11. T hi s C our tfol l ow ed M
. R
. C
. P. 5 i n B ro c a to and hel d t hatt he m echani cs of M
. R. C. P. 5 a re c o n tr o llin g w h e n n o tic e is re q u ir e d a s a p re lim in a ry s te p to f ilin g a la w s u it. B ro c a to ,

### 7

503 So. 2d at243. W hi l e t he st atut e undercons i der at i on her e i s di ffe r entt han i n B ro c a to , t hi s C our t ’ s hol di ng i s appl i cabl e t o t he not i ce r equi r ementof M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36. E ven though B ro c a to conce r ns a l i bel act i on i ti s an alog o u s t o t hi s cas e bec aus e the
a p p lica b le sta tu te h a s a re q u ire m e n t to p ro v id e n o tice p rio r to f ili n g su it. L ik e w ise , in th is
c a se , M iss
. C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1 -3 6
. c o n c e rn s n o tice to h e a lth c a re p ro v id e rs p rio r to f ili n g su it. Fur t her , M
. R
. C
. P. 4( c) ( 5) i s di s t i ngui s habl e fr om M
. R
. C
. P. 5 beca us e i tconce r ns i s s ui ng a
s um m ons and compl ai nton a per s on out s i de the s t at e of M i s s i s s i ppi , w hi ch i s not the fa ct situ a tio n h e re . D r. P ro li i s n o t o u tsid e th e S tate o f M iss iss ip p i. ¶12. T hi s C our tfi nds t hatl i ke B ro c a to , M
. R
. C
. P. 5 i s contr ol l i ng i n t hi s cas e. T her efor e, not i ce w as compl et e on the dat e H athor n m ai l ed t he l et t er t o D r . Pr ol i
. H athor n m ai l ed the not i ce t o Dr
. Pr o l i o n Apr i l 2 2 , 2 0 0 4
. Th e r e f o r e , t h e t r i a l c o u r te r r e d i n c o ncl udi ng ot herw i s e. B
. St atut e of Li m i t at i ons ¶1 3
. H atho rn ad m its that the statu te o f li m it ati o n s b eg an to run o n the d ate o f B ed w ell ’s death, M ay18, 2002. T her ef o re, the re is no di s put e i n t he r ecor d as t o w hen the tw o- y ear
s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons began t o run. D r . Pr ol i ar gues that the s ui t , t her efor e, had t o be fi l ed byM ay18, 2004. H ow ever , t he not i ce pr ovi s i on of M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15) pr ovi des th a t “if th e n o ti c e is s e rv e d w ith in six ty(6 0 ) d a y s p rio r to th e e x p ira tio n o f th e a p p lica b le sta tu te o f lim itatio n s, th e tim e f

o r th e c o m m e n c e m e n t o f th e a c tio n sh a ll b e e x ten d e d six ty ( 6 0 ) da ys f

r o m t he s e r v i c e o f

t he no t i ce f

o r s a id h e a lth c a re p ro v id e rs a n d o th e rs .”

### 8

( emphasi s added)
. D r . Pr ol i ar gues t hatbeca us e H athor n m ai l ed the not i ce on A pr i l 2 2, 2004, t he compl ai nthad t o be fi l ed on orbefor e J une 21, 2004, i n or der t o compl yw i t h t he tw o -y ea r st atute o f li m it ati o n s set fo rth in M iss. C o d e A n n . § § 1 5 -1-3 6 (2) an d 1 5 -1-3 6 (15 ). ¶ 1 4
. H at hor n ar gues t h a tc o u n s e l ma i l e d t h e n o t i c e v i a c e r t i f i e d ma i l ; t h e r efor e, t he

r ece i ved d a te o f A p ril 3 0 , 2 0 0 4 , co n tro ls th is c a se p u rsu a n t to M .R .C .P . 4 (c )(5 ). S h e a ss e rts t h at w it h t he 60 dayext ens i on per i od t he compl ai nthad t o be fi l ed on orbefor e J une 28, 2004. H athor n as s er t s t hats he fi l ed t he compl ai nt on J une 24, 2004, w hi ch w as w i t hi n t he statu te of li m it ati o n s p eriod
. M iss. C o d e A n n . § § 1 5 -1-3 6 (2) a n d 1 5 -1-3 6 (15 ). N eith er D r. P rol i no r H at ho rn ar e corr ecti n thei r cal culat i on s. ¶15. T hi s C our tr ece nt l ydeci ded Po p e v . B r ock , 9 1 2 S o . 2 d 9 35 ( M i s s . 2005) , w hi ch
conce r ns t he appl i cat i on of M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15)
. B ot h D r . Pr ol i and H athor n fi l ed t hei r br i efs i n s uppor t of t hi s appea l pr i ort o t hi s C our t ’ s deci s i on i n P ope . T her efor e, nei t her par t y , nort he tr i al cour t , had the bene fi tof the P ope d ec isi on dur i ng t he hea r i ng on t he
m o tio n to d ism iss o r a t th e tim e o f th e ir in iti a l f

ili n g s to th is C o u rt. ¶16. Pope, an admi ni s t r atr i x of the es t at e of N ancySpr i nger , gave w r i t t en not i ce on M ay 30, 2003, t o a number of doct or s and a medi cal cent ercl ai m i ng pr ofes s i onal negl i gence on b e h a lf o f S p ri n g e r’ s e s ta te . P ope , 9 3 6 S o . 2 d a t 9 3 6 . S p ri n g e r d ie d o n J u n e 2 , 2 0 0 1
. Id
. Pope r efr ai ned fr om fi l i ng s ui tforw hat s he bel i eved t o be t he pr opernot i ce pe r i od and then f ile d a w ro n g f

u l d e a th s u it o n J u ly 3 0 , 2 0 0 3
. Id
. T he tr i al cou rtgrant ed a m oti on t o d i sm i ss f in d in g th a t P o p e ’s s u it w a s b a rr e d b yth e s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s . Id
.

### 9

¶17. T hi s C our t w as fac ed w i t h det erm i ni ng how t o i nt erpr et M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36
w hen no t i ce i s gi ven w i t hin 6 0 day s o f t he exp i rat i on of t he t w o-y ear st atute of l i m i t at i on s. A s s t at ed above , t he s t atut e pr ovi des t hat“[i ] f the not i ce i s s erved w i t hi n s i xt y( 60) day s pr i or t o t he expi r at i on of the appl i cabl e s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons , t he t i m e fort he comm ence m entof t he ac t i on s hal l be ext ended s i xt y( 60) day s fr om t h e servi ce of t he not i ce” t o t he medi cal pr o v i der s . M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15)
. O n t he one ha nd, t hi s C our tfound thatt he
s t atut e i n P ope coul d b e interpr et ed as pr ovi di ng a s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons t hatr an 6 0 da ys f r om t he dat e of s e r vi c e of t he not i c e r e qui r e m e nt
. P ope , 912 So. 2d at936. O n t he other h a n d , the lan g u a g e “ sh a ll b e e x ten d e d ” c o u ld b e in ter p re ted to m e a n a to lli n g o f th e sta tu te
o f lim ita tio n s f

o r 6 0 d a y s . Id
. T he l at t eri nt erpr et at i on pr act i cal l yappl i ed al l ow s fora tw oy ear and si xtydayst atute of l i m i t at i on s. ¶18. I n P ope , t hi s C our t cons i der ed bot h M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36 and M i s s . C ode A nn. § 1 5-1-57 i n it s anal y si s. M i ss. C od e A nn . § 1 5-1-57 st at es: W hen anyper s on sh al l be pr ohi bi t ed byl aw . . . fr om comm enci ng or pr os ecut i ng anyact i on or r emedy , t he t i m e dur i ng w hi ch s uch per s on s hal l be s o p r o h i b i t e d
. . . s ha l l no t b e c o mp u t e d a s a n yp a r to f t h e p e r i o d o f

t i me l i m i t ed byt hi s chapt erfort he comm ence m entof s uch ac t i on. W hen consi d ering b ot h of thes e s t atut es , t hi s C our thel d t hatt he tw o- y ears t atut e of lim ita tio n s in M is s . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1 -3 6 is to lle d f o r s ix ty d a y s . P ope , 912 So. 2d at939. T hi s C our thel d: Si nce Pope w as pr ohi bi t ed by l aw fr om fi l i ng s ui t dur i ng t he s i xt y - daynot i ce per i od, t hi s s t atut e cl ear l yand unam b iguousl ypr ohi bi t s us e of a nyof the si xty -dayno t i ce peri od i n com pu t i ng t he run ning of t he st atute of li m i t at i on s.

### 10

Si nce Pope or i gi nal l yhad tw o y ear s t o fi l e s ui tunderSect i on 15- 1- 36( 2) , and s i nce Pope w as “pr ohi bi t ed byl aw ” fr om fi l i ng s ui tfort he s i xt y - dayper i od, a l i t er al appl i cat i on of the w or di ng of the s t atut e r es ul t s in a st atut e of l i m i t at i ons per i od of tw o y ear s and s i xt yday s , w hi ch expi r ed on A ugus t1, 2 0 0 3 . W e f

in d n o sta tu te w h ich e x p licitly re n d e rs S e c tio n 1 5 -1 -5 7 in a p p o site t o t hi s cas e, al t hough a r eas onabl e ar gum ent can be made t hati ti s i n confl i ct w ith S ec ti o n 1 5 -1-3 6 (15 ). I d . at938. T o cl ar i fy our deci s i on i n P ope , t his C ou rtho l ds t hat the ti m e peri od i s ext ended , no t toll ed, pur s uantt o t he l anguage of M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15)
. Pur s uantt o P ope , t hi s C our t ’ s i nt erpr et at i on of M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15) appl i ed t o t hi s cas e r equi r es us to a ffi r m t he tr i al cour tdeci s i on. H ow ever , t hi s deci s i on i s bas ed upon di ffe r entgr ounds th a n th o s e a rg u e d a n d ru le d u p o n b yth e tr ia l c o u rt . ¶1 9
. T h is C o u rtfin d s tha t M
. R
. C
. P
. 5 is co n tr o llin g in this case , n o t M
. R
. C
. P
. 4 (c)(5). P ursuant t o M
. R
. C
. P
. 5, no t i ce i s served on t he dat e t hat the n oti ce i s m ai l ed
. I n t hi s cas e,
no t i ce w as m ai l ed

on A pr il 2 2 , 2 0 0 4
. A ppl y i ng t he r eas oni ng of P ope to th e f a c ts o f th is
cas e, w hen H athor n m ai l ed hernot i ce t o Pr ol i on A pr i l 22, 2004, s he had 26 da y s unt i l t he 2 ye a rs t a tu t e o f

l i m i t a t i o n e x p i r e d o n M a y 1 8 , 2 0 0 4
. H o w e v e r , H a t h o r n h a d t o s e n d 6 0 d a ys not i ce pr i ort o comm enci ng an ac t i on agai ns tanyheal t h car e pr ovi der
. M iss
. C ode A nn. § 1 5 -1 -3 6 (1 5 ). O n A p ril 2 2 , 2 0 0 4 , H a th o rn b e g a n th e 6 0 d a yw a iti n g p e rio d a s s e t f o rth in M iss. C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1-3 6 (15 ). ¶ 2 0
. Pur s uant t o M i s s . Cod e Ann
. § 1 5
- 1
- 5 7 , whe n a per s on i s pr ohi bi t ed fr om
comm enci ng an ac t i on, t he t i m e dur i ng w hi ch a per s on i s pr ohi bi t ed “s hal l notbe comput ed
as anypar tof the per i od of t i m e l i m i t ed byt h is C h ap ter f ort he comm ence m entof the

### 11

act i on. ” The n ot i ce pe r i od pr ohi bi t ed H athor n fr om comm enci ng heract i on fora 60 day per i od. T he norm al s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons on a ca s e of t hi s natur e i s t w o y ear s . T her efor e, t he 60 dayno t i ce p e rio d c o u ld no tbe co m pu t ed as pa rtof the t w o y ear s t atute of l i m i t at i on s. H er e, t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons began t o run o n M ay 1 8 , 2 002. N or m al l y , t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons w oul d end on M ay18, 2004. H ow ever , M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15) r equi r ed a 60 daynot i ce pe r i od, butt hi s 60 dayper i od coul d not be com put ed as par t of t he tw o y ear
s ta tu te o f lim ita tio n s . See M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 57. W hen H athor n m ai l ed her s ervi ce of not i ce on A pr i l 22, 2004, s he had t o w ai tunt i l J une 21, 2004, and no l at er t han J ul y17, 2004, to f ile h e r c a se . H a th o rn f

iled h e r c o m p lain t o n Ju n e 2 4 , 2 0 0 4 , w h ich w a s w ith in th e sta tu te of l i m i t at i ons . A cc o rdin gl y , t he tr i al cour tdeci s i on i s aff i r m ed, butbas ed upon di ffe r ent groun ds. CO NC L US I ON ¶21. T hi s C o u rt fin d s that M
. R
. C
. P. 5 contr ol s w hen the dat e of not i ce i s compl et e. M .R .C .P . 5 c o n sid e rs s e rv ice to b e c o m p lete o n th e d a te o f m a ili n g . N o tice w a s m a iled to D r . Pr ol i on A pr i l 22, 2004. M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 15) pr ovi des fora 60 dayext ens i on i f s er vi ce of

t he not i ce oc cur s w i t hi n 60 day s o f the ex p i r at i on of the tw o- y ears t atut e of l i m i t at i ons . T hi s C our t ’ s rul i ng i n P ope i s contr ol l i ng. U ndert hes e r es t r i ct i ons , H athor n had t o fi l e hercompl ai nton oraft erJ une 21, 2004, and no l at er t han J ul y 17, 2004. She fi l ed her compl ai nton J une 24, 2004, w hi ch w as w el l w i t hi n t he st atut e of l i m i t at i ons . T her efor e, t he t r i al cour t err ed by fi ndi ng t hat M
. R
. C
. P. 4( c) ( 5) w as contr ol l i ng i n t hi s cas e. H ow ever , t he

### 12

t r i al cour tw as corr ecti n fi ndi ng t hatH athor n w as notbarr ed byt he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons , but forr eas ons ot hert han thos e det erm i ned byt he tr i al cour t . T hi s C our t aff i r m s t he j udgm ent
o f th e Jo n e s C o u n tyC irc u it C o u rt d e n y in g D r. P ro li’s m o ti o n to d ism iss a n d re m a n d s th is
cas e t o t he tr i al cour tforfur t herpr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i t h thi s opi ni on. ¶ 2 2
. AF F I RM ED AND RE M ANDE D. S M I T H , C .J ., W A L L E R A N D C O B B , P . J J . , C A R L S O N A N D D IC K I N S O N , J J ., CO NC UR . DI AZ , GR AV E S AN D R AN DO L P H, J J . , NO T P AR T I CI P AT I NG .