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 8 - CA- 0 0 6 8 8 - S CT T HE ES T AT E O F A RD EL UA J

OHNS ON, BY

AN D T HROU GH AL L I

E S HAW, I NDI VI DUA L L Y A ND ASEX EC UT RI X O F T HE ES T AT E O F A RD EL UA JO H N S ON , A N D F OR T

H E U S E A N D B EN E F IT OF THE W

RONGFUL DEATH BENEFICI ARI ES OF AR DEL UA J

OHNS ON
v. GRACELAND CARE CENT ER OF OXFORD, LL C, GRA C EL A N D M A N A G EM EN T C OM P A N Y , I N C ., GRAC ELAN D HOL DI

NGS , L . P. , GRAC

ELAN D I NC. , LAF

AYET TE L TD, I

NC. , KAT

I E M . O V ER S T R EE T Q T I PT R U S T , K A T I E M. OVERS TRE

ET T RUS T, LAR RY OVERS TRE ET AND J OH N B. ( “ LEY ” ) FAL KNER, M

ARY W I L S ON ON M OTI ON F OR RE HEAR I NG D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 03/ 28/ 2008 TRI AL J UD GE: HO N. HEN RY L. LAC KEY COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: LAF AYETT E COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT A TTO RN EY S FO R A PPELL A N T: SU SA N N I CH O LS EST ES CA M ERO N C HR I STOPHER J EHL ATT ORNEYS F OR APP EL LE ES : AND Y LOW RY T H O M A S L . K IR K L A N D , J R . NA TUR E OF THE C ASE: CI VI L - W RO NG FUL D EATH D I SPO SI T I O N : R E V E R SE D A N D R E M A N D E D - 08/ 12/ 2010 M O T I O N FO R R E H E A R I N G FI L E D : 06/ 07/ 2010 M ANDAT E I S S UE D:

### 2 CO NSOLI DATED W I TH NO. 2 0 0 8 - I A- 0 1 7 6 2 - S CT
DESOTO H

EALTH CAR E, I

NC . d / b / a DESOTO HEALT HCARE CENTER
v. TI M OTHY CONLEY
D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 10/ 02/ 2008 T R IA L JU D G E : H O N . R O B E R T P . C H A M B E R L IN COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: DES OTO COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT ATT ORNEYS F OR APP EL LANT: AND Y LOW RY T HOMAS L . KI RK L AND ATT ORNEY F OR APP EL LE E: BOBBY F
. M ARTI N, J R. NA TUR E OF THE C ASE: CI VI L - W RO NG FUL D EATH D I SPO SI T I O N : A FFIRM E D A N D R E M A N D E D - 08/ 12/ 2010 M O T I O N FO R R E H E A R I N G FI L E D : 06/ 07/ 2010 M ANDAT E I S S UE D: EN BA NC. PI ERCE, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: ¶ 1
. T h e m o tio n f

o r re h e a ri n g is d e n ied . T h e p re v io u s o p in io n is w ith d ra w n , an d th is
o p inion is sub sti tuted there for. ¶2. T he pr es ent m att er s t em s fr om tw o cases w hi ch w er e cons ol i dat ed f or purpos es of
a p p e a l. B o th c a se s in v o lv e id e n tica l issu e s: w h e th e r a tr ia l c o u rt m a y p ro p e rly g ra n t a M i s s i s s i ppi R ul e of

Ci vi l Pr ocedur e 12( b) ( 6) mot i on t o di s m i s s as t o the s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons on a medi cal
- m al pr act i ce c l ai m w hen the compl ai ntal l eges the vi ct i m w as of uns ound m i nd,
a n d d id n o t re g a in so u n d n e ss o f m in d p rio r to d e a th ; an d w h e th e r a ll t o rts a lleg e d a g a in st a
n u rs in g h o m e w h ich a rise fro m th e c a re o f its p a tien ts a re su b su m e d in th e m e d ica l-

### Th e suit w as filed ag ainst G r ace l and C ar e C ent erof O xf or d, L L C , G r ace l and 1 M a n a g e m e n t C o m p a n y , In c ., G ra c e la n d H o ld in g s , L P , G ra c e la n d s , In c ., L a fa y e tte L td , In c ., Ka t i e M . Ov e r s tr e e t , QTI P Tru s t , Ka t i e M . Ove r s tr e e tTru s t , La rry Ov e r s tr e e t , J o h n B. (“ L e y ” ) F a lk n e r, an d n u m e ro u s o th e r u n id e n tified d e fe n d a n ts 

### (c oll ec tively re ferred to as “Grac el and. ”)
. 3 m a lp ra c tice c a u se o f a c tio n . A ss u m in g , as w e m u st, fo r R u le 1 2 (b )(6 ) p u rp o se s, th a t th e fa c ts al l eged i n the pl ai nt i f

f s ’ compl ai nt s ar e true, the s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons began t o run upon the d e c e d e n ts’ d e a th s. T h e re fo re , n e ith e r la w su it m a y p ro p e rly b e d ism iss e d p u rsu a n t to R u le 1 2 (b )(6 ). T h u s, the tri a l co u rt’s ru lin g in D eSoto Heal thcar e, I nc. v. Conley i s af

f i rm ed, and the tr i al court ’ s rul i ng i n Es ta te o f J o hn s o n v. Gr a c e la nd

Car e Ce nte ro

f Oxf o r d , LLC , is
re v e rse d
. B e c a u se this issu e is dis p o sitiv e an d b o th c a se s m u st b e re m a n d e d to th e trial c o u rt, the i ssue of w hetherall o ther cau ses of act i on are s ub sum ed in the m edical -m al pract i ce cau se of act i on need notbe addr es s ed atthi s t i m e. S TATEM ENT OF FACTS Es ta te o f J o hn s o n v. Gr a c e la nd

Car e Ce nte ro

f Oxf o r d , LLC ¶3. A r del ua J ohns on w as a r es i dentof G racel and C are C enterof O xf or d, L L C , f

r om S e p tem b e r 1 , 2 0 0 1 , u n til Ju n e 8 , 2 0 0 4 . J o h n so n su b se q u e n tly d ied o n Ju ly 1 6 , 2 0 0 4 . A lli e S h aw , the e x ec u tr ix o f th e e stat e o f A rde lua J o h n so n (he reina ft er refe rred to as “Jo h n so n ”),
served no t i ce of i ntentt o sue G racel and on July 7, 20 06 , and subsequ entl y fi l ed suitagainst 1 G r ace l and on Sept ember11, 2006. T he compl ai ntal l eged mul t i pl e count s of negl i gence , m edi cal m al pr act i ce, gr os s negl i gence , f r aud, br eac h of

f i duci ary du ty, s t atut ory s urvi val
c la im s , a n d s ta tu to ry w ro n g fu l d e a th
.

### (b)
. . . the f oll owing de fense s m ay at t he option of thepl eader

bemade by m oti on: 2



### . . .( 6) Failureto s tatea c laim upon whic h re li ef

can be granted. Mis s. R. Civ. P. 12. 4 ¶4. G r ace l and f

i l ed a R ul e 12( b) ( 6) mot i on t o dis m i ss the suiton O ct ob er 26, 2006. 2 G r ace l and cl ai m ed J ohns on’ s m edi cal
- m al pr act i ce c l ai m w as barr ed by the st atut e of l i mi t a t i o n s . Gr a c e l a n d f u rth e ra l l e g e d th a tJ o h n s o n h a d mi s c h a r a c t e r i z e d th e o th e rc l a i ms agai ns ti tpl ead a r ound the medi cal
- m al pr act i ce s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons. Fi nal l y, the mot i on
a lleg e d th a t th e c o m p lain t fa iled to sta te a c a u se o f a c tio n a g a in st th e d e fe n d a n ts, fa iled to p lead frau d w i th p art i cular i ty, and fai l ed to st at e a cau se of act i on forbreach o f f i du ci ary d u ty . ¶5. A ft er a heari ng o n the m att er, the tr i al cou rtrul ed thatal l of the p l ai nti ff’s cl ai m s arose fro m a lleg e d m e d ica l m a lp ra c tice b y G ra c e lan d . T h e tria l c o u rt fu rth e r h e ld th a t th e m e d ica lm al pr act i ce s t atut e of

l i m i t at i ons began t o run the l as tday J ohns on r ece i ved tr eatm entf r om G rac elan d , an d there fore , the p lai n ti ff’ s claim s w ere ti m e-b arred
. T h e p lai n ti ff’ s claim s w ere d ism iss e d w ith p re

ju d ice , an d Jo h n so n b rin g s th e p re se n t ap p e a l. D eSoto Heal

thcar e, I nc. v. Conley ¶ 6
. E ste r B . C o n le y w a s tr e a ted a t D e S o to H e a lth c a re C e n terfro m A u g u st 2 0 0 5 u n til February 23, 2006, and s ubs equent l y di ed on M ar ch 19, 2006. T hom as C onl ey, the s urvi vor and hei rof

E s t erB . C onl ey, s erved not i ce of i nt entt o s ue D eSot o H eal thcar e on J anuary 10, 2008. C onl ey then f

i l ed the compl ai nti n thi s m att eron M ay 19, 2008. T he compl ai nt al l eged ne gl i gence , gr os s negl i gence , m edi cal m al pract i ce, br eac h of contr act , br eac h of fid u c iar y d u ty , an d v io latio n o f th e M iss iss ip p i U n fa ir a n d D e c e p tiv e T ra d e P ra c tice s A c t.

### 5

¶7. D eSot o H eal thchar e f i l ed a Rul e 12( b) ( 6) m ot i on t o di s m i s s the s ui ton J une 18, 2008, al l egi ng thatal l of

the pl ai nt i f

f’ s cl ai m s ar os e outof

an al l eged medi cal
- m al pr act i ce a ct i on, and the compl ai ntw as t i m e- barr ed by the medi cal
- m al pr act i ce s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons . A f

t er a hea r i ng on the mat t er , the tr i al courtent er ed an or derdenyi ng D eSot o H eal thcar e’ s m ot i on
on O ct ob er 2, 20 08
. F rom that or der, D eS oto H eal thcare app eal s. A N A L Y S IS ¶ 8
. B o th c a se s ra ise id e n tica l issu e s o n a p p e a l: I . W he t he r t he c om pl ai nt s ati s s ue we r e f i l e d t i m e l y un de r M i s s i s s i ppi C ode Sect i on § 15- 1- 36. I I . W het her t he pl ai n ti f f s can m ai nt ai n cause s of act i on apart f

rom m edi calm al pract i ce, w hen such caus es of act i on ari s e out of

care and tr eat m ent i n a nu rs i ng hom e. F ind ing Issu e I to b e d ispo sit ive, w e n ee d n o t add ress Issu e II. ¶9. T his C ou rtrevi ew s a m oti on t o d i sm i ss de novo
. S c ag gs v. GP C

H -GP , I n c., 931 So. 2 d 1 2 7 4 , 1 2 7 5 (M iss
. 2 0 0 6 ). W h e n re v iew in g a m o tio n to d ism iss , all o f th e a lleg a tio n s in th e p la in tif

f’ s c o m p la in t m u s t b e ta k e n a s tru e . I d . T he m oti on shou l d n ot be grant ed u nles s “itap p ea rs be y o n d d o u b t th at th e p lai n ti ff w il l be u n ab le t o p rov e an y set of fac ts i n su p p o rt of hi s cl ai m . ” I

d . ( quot i ng L a n gv. B a

y S t. L o u is/W

a ve lan dS c h . D ist. , 764 So. 2d 1234, 1236 ( M i s s . 1999) )
. T he f i ndi ngs of

the tr i al courtw i l l notbe di s turbed on r evi ew unl es s they
a re m a n if

e s tly w ro n g , c le a r ly e rr o n e o u s o r a n e rr o n e o u s le g a l s ta n d a rd w a s a p p lie d
. I d. ( ci t i ng B e ll v. City o

f B a y S t. L o u is , 4 6 7 S o . 2 d 6 5 7 , 6 6 1 (M iss. 1 9 8 5 )). ¶10. T he pl ai nt i f

f s ’ medi c a l
- mal pr a c t i c e c l a i ms ar e s ub j e c tt o the s t a tut e of

l i mi t a t i ons f

ound in the M issi ssipp i m ed ical-m alpra cti ce ac t, M issi ssipp i C o d e S ec ti o n § 1 5 -1-3 6 (2):

### “The term ‘ins titution for

aged or inf ir m’ inc lude s nur sing home s. . . .”Mis s. Code 3 

### Ann. § 43- 11-1 ( Rev. 2009). A tthi s s t age i n the p r ocee di ngs , al l of the pl ai nt i f

f s ’ cl ai m s m us tbe t aken a s true. 4 S c ag gs v. GP C

H -GP , I n c., 9 3 1 S o . 2 d 1 2 7 4 , 1 2 7 5 (M iss. 2 0 0 6 ).



### 6 F or any c l aim accrui ng on or af t er July 1, 19 98 , and excep tas otherw i se pr ovi ded i n thi s s ect i on, no cl ai m i n t ortm ay be br oughtagai ns ta l i cens ed phys i ci an, ost eopath, dent i s t , hospi t al , i ns t i tut i on f orthe age d ori nf

i rm , nur s e, 3 p h a rm a c ist, p o d iatrist, o p tom etri st or ch ir o p rac tor for injuries o r w ro n g fu l d e a th ar i s i ng outof

the cour s e of

m edi cal , s ur gi cal or otherpr of es s i onal s ervi ces unl es s i ti s f

i l ed w i thi n tw o ( 2) ye ar s f r om the dat e the al l eged a ct , om i s s i on or negl ects hal l orw i th r eas onabl e di l i gen ce m i ghthave be en f i r s tknow n or d isc o v e re d , an d
. . . in n o e v e n t m o re th a n se v e n (7 ) y e a rs a fte r th e a lleg e d a c t, om i s s i on ornegl ectoccurr ed. M iss. C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1-3 6 (2) (R ev . 2 0 0 3 ). ¶11. B oth plai nti f

f s as s ert that the dece dent s w er e under the di s abi l i ty of uns oundnes s of
m ind w h il e re side n ts at the n u rsi n g h o m es a n d u n ti l th e ti m es o f th eir de aths
. T h e L eg isl ature 4
e n a c t e d a s p e c i f

i c s t a tu t e o f

l i mi t a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g p l a i n t i f f s wi th me d i c a l
- ma l p r a c t i c e c l a i ms
w h o a re u n d e r th e d isa b ili ty o f u n so u n d n e ss o f m in d , w h ich re a d s a s fo llo w s: I f atthe t i m e atw hi ch the caus e of act i on s hal l orw i th reas on abl e di l i gence m i ghthave been f

i r s tknow n or di s cover ed, the per s on t o w hom s uch cl ai m has acc rued s hal l be underthe dis abi l i t y of uns oundnes s of

m i nd , then s uch per s on orthe per s on cl ai m i ng thr ough hi m m ay, notw i ths t andi ng thatthe per i od of tim e h e re in b e fo re lim ite d s h a ll h a v e e x p ir e d , c o m m e n c e a c tio n o n su c h c la im atany t i m e w i thi n tw o (

2) year s next af t erthe t i m e at

w hi ch the per

s on to w hom the r ights hal lhave f

i rs taccr ued s hal lhave c eas ed to be underthe dis abi l i t y, ors hal lhave di ed, w hi chev ers hal lhave f i rs toccurr ed
. M i ss. C od e A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 5) ( emphasi s added) ( R ev. 2003)
. H ow ever , both def endant
nur s i ng hom es cl ai m thats ubs ect i on ( 5) of the medi cal
- m al pr act i ce s t atut e i s l i m i t ed by subsect i on (6) , w hich r eads as fol l ow s: W hen any pe r s on w ho s hal l be underthe dis abi l i t i es m ent i oned i n s ubs ect i ons ( 3), ( 4) and ( 5) of this s ect i on atthe t i m e atw hi ch hi s r i ghts hal l ha ve f i rs t

### 7

a c c ru e d , sh a ll de

p a rt th is life w ith o u t h a v in gc e a se d to b e u n de r s u c h d isa b ili ty , no t i m e s hal lbe al l ow ed by r eas on of the dis abi l i t

y of s uch per s on t o comm ence act i on on the cl ai m of

s uch per s on beyond the per i od pr es cr i bed underSect i on 15- 1- 55 , M i s s i s s i ppi C ode of 1972. M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 6) (R ev. 2003) ( emphasi s added)
. Subse ct i on ( 6) r ef er s t o the l i m i t at i on s peri od est abli shed in M i ssi ssi pp i C od e S ect i on § 1 5-1-55, w hich r eads as fol l ow s: I f a per s on ent i t l ed t o bri ng an y of the per s onal act i ons her ei n m ent i oned, or liab le to a n y s u c h a c tio n , sh a ll d ie b e fo re th e e x p ira tio n o f th e tim e h e re in l i m i t ed ther ef

or , s uch ac t i on m ay be c om m ence d by oragai ns tthe exec ut oror a d m in is tr a to r o f t h e d e c e a s e d p e rs o n , af t erthe ex

pi r at i on o

f said t i m e, and w i thi n one ye araf

t erthe death of

s uch per s on . M is s . C o d e A n n . § 1 5 -1 -5 5 (R e v . 2 0 0 3 ) ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ). ¶12. T hi s C ourt has l ong hel d that thi s s ect i on i s “appl i cabl e onl y w her e the death of the per s on occur s w i thi n the l as tye arof the .
. . t i m e f

orthe compl et i on of

the bar
. ” H

am br ick
v. Jones , 62 M i s s . 240, 8 So. 176, 177 ( M i s s . 1886)
. T hi s i s becaus e, onl y w hen the dec edent d ies w ith in a y e a r o f th e a p p lica b le s tatu te o f lim itatio n s, c a n th e re b e a tim e p e rio d th a t is both “ af t erth e e x p ir a tio n o f [ th e a p p lic a b le s ta tu te o f l im ita tio n s ], and w i thi n one yea raf

t er the dea th of

s uch per s on, ” as r equi r ed by M i s s i s s i ppi C ode Sect i on 15-1- 55. R egar dl es s of wh e th e rS e c t i o n 15
- 1
- 3 6 ( 6 ) i n c o rp o r a t e s S e c t i o n 1 5
- 1
- 5 5 i n i t s e n t i r e ty , o ro n l y th e t i me per i od pr es cr i bed ther ei n, as cont ended by the def endant s , the r es ul ti s the s ame. ¶13. B ecaus e i ti s a l l eged thatboth A r del ua J ohns on and Est erB . C onl ey r emai ned under th e d isa b ili ty o f u n so u n d n e ss o f m in d at th e ti m e o f th e ir d e a th s, S e c tio n 1 5 -1 -3 6 (6 ) p o in ts t o Sect i on 15- 1- 55 as the l i m i t at i ons per i od o n ly if ther e i s a pe r i od i n t i m e w hi ch w as af t er the ex pir at i on of the m ed ical -m al pract i ce st atute of l i m i t at i on s and

w i thi n one yea rof

the dece dent ’ s death. I n thi s m att er , ther e i s no s uch t i m e per i od, because S ect i on 15- 1- 36( 5)

### 8

al l ow s f ora n a ct i on t o be comm ence d at a n y ti m e w ith in tw o y ea rs of the d ecede nts ’ deaths,
s i nce the pl ai nt i f

f s cl ai m thei rdeaths occurr ed pr i ort o the dece dent s ’ ceas i ng t o be underthe di s abi l i ty of

uns oundnes s of

m i nd. ¶14. W e can thi nk of no s i tuat i on i n w hich a per s on of uns ound m i nd w oul d di e w i thout
c e a sin g to b e u n d e r th e d isa b ili ty o f u n so u n d m in d a n d w ith in o n e y e a r o f h is o r h e r m e d ica lm al pr act i ce s t atut e of

l i m i t at i ons runni ng – as cont empl at ed by s ubs ect i on ( 6) and Sect i on 15- 1- 55 – becaus e s ubs ect i on ( 5) gr ant s thatpe r s on a tw o- yearl i m i t at i ons per i od af t erhi s or her death. T heref

ore, subsect i on (6) i s i nap pli cable t o either case pres entl y b efor e us. ¶ 1 5 . T h e re fo re , in th e ca se s b e fo re u s to d a y , a ss u m in g the a lleg a tio n s in th e tw o c o m p lain ts are true, the respect i ve st atutes of li m it ati on s began running at the ti m e of the d ecede nts ’ deaths
. M i s s . C ode A nn. § 15- 1- 36( 5) ( R ev. 2003)
. A tthi s s t age i n the pr ocee di ngs , nei ther
c o m p la in t c a n b e d is m is s e d a s u n tim e ly u n d e r R u le 1 2 (b )( 6 ). CO NC L US I ON ¶16. B as ed on t he f

or egoi ng anal ys i s , the m ot i on t o di s m i s s w as pr oper l y deni ed i n D eS o to Heal t hcar e, I nc. v. Conley and i m pr oper l y gr ant ed i n E state of Joh n son v. G racelan d Care Ce n te ro f Ox fo r d , L L C . B ecause w e m ustassum e as true al l the all egati on s i n the pl ai nti ff s’
com plai nt s , nei therm att ercan be pr oper l y di s m i s s ed as unt i m el y thr ough a R ul e 12( b) ( 6)
m ot i on, be caus e – a ccor di ng t o Sec t i on 15- 1- 36( 5) – the s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons f

ornei ther p lain tiff b e g a n to ru n u n til th e ir d e a th s. T h e re fo re , b o th m a tters a re re m a n d e d to th e ir
r es pect i ve tr i al court s f

orpr ocee di ngs cons i s t entw i th thi s opi ni on. AS T O 20 0 8 - CA- 0 0 6 8 8 - S CT-ES TAT E OF J OH NSON v. GRACELAND CARE CEN TER O F OXFORD , LLC : R E V E R SE D A N D R E M A N D E D ; A S T O 20 08 -I A - 01762- S CT-DES OTO HEALT HCARE, I

NC. v. CONLEY: AF F I RM ED AND RE M ANDE D.

### 9

W AL L E R, C. J . , C AR L S ON A ND GR AV E S , P . J J . , DI CK I NS ON , RA ND OL P H, LA M AR, KI TC HENS AND CHAN DL ER , J J . , CONCUR.