Opinion ID: 2598967
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Does RCW 7.70.150 conflict with CR 8 and 11?

Text: ¶ 16 RCW 7.70.150 requires plaintiffs in medical malpractice actions to file a certificate of merit with the pleadings. [3] The certificate of merit must contain a statement from an expert that, based on the information known at the time of executing the certificate of merit, ... there is a reasonable probability that the defendant's conduct did not follow the accepted standard of care. RCW 7.70.150(3). ¶ 17 This requirement directly conflicts with CR 11, which states that attorneys do not have to verify pleadings in medical malpractice actions, as well as CR 8, which details our system of notice pleading. First, RCW 7.70.150 conflicts with CR 11 because it requires the attorney to submit additional verification of the pleadings  a requirement that CR 11 explicitly limits to dissolution of marriage, separation, declarations concerning the validity of a marriage, custody, and [related modifications]. CR 11(a). Second, RCW 7.70.150 conflicts with CR 8 and our system of notice pleading, which requires only a short and plain statement of the claim and a demand for relief in order to file a lawsuit. CR 8(a). Under notice pleading, plaintiffs use the discovery process to uncover the evidence necessary to pursue their claims. Doe, 117 Wash.2d at 782, 819 P.2d 370. The certificate of merit requirement essentially requires plaintiffs to submit evidence supporting their claims before they even have an opportunity to conduct discovery and obtain such evidence. For that reason, the certificate of merit requirement fundamentally conflicts with the civil rules regarding notice pleading  one of the primary components of our justice system.