Margaret Meads , Judge. On appeal, appellants contend that summary judgment was improper because the trial court erroneously determined that the continuing treatment theory, which would have tolled the statute of limitations, was not applicable to their case. Summary judgment is reserved for cases thathave no genuine factual disputes. The moving party bears the burden of sustaining a motion for summary judgment, and once that burden is met, the opposing party must meet proof with proof to demonstrate that a material issue of fact still exists. On appeal, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the opposing party.
Summary judgment is proper when the statute of limitations bars the action.
The medical malpractice statute of limitations, codified at Ark. Code Ann. The date of the accrual of the cause of action shall be the date of the wrongful act complained of and no other time. In August 1986, appellant returned to see appellee, he surgically removed benign papillomas, and she returned for an office visit in September 1986. In 1987, there was an August office visit and an August surgical procedure to remove nasalpolyps, followed by office visits in August and November. This procedure was followed up with office visits on August 24 and November 30.