Court Opinion

ID: 9591534
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:04:53.368991+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:22.566661
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(concurring specially).
[¶ 20.] Hopefully, this case will put to rest any lingering questions reflected in the numerous writings in Richards v. Lenz, 539 N.W.2d 80 (S.D.1995) and Rehm v. Lenz, 1996 SD 51, 547 N.W.2d 560. It should be clear by now that the two-year medical malpractice statute of limitations applies to a psychologist treating depression whether the claim is based on contract or tort; that SDCL 15-2-14.1 covers all medical malpractice, error, mistake or failure to cure, whether the claim is based on contract or tort; and that one cannot avoid the obvious statute of limitations simply by alleging negligent hiring or supervision or by labeling a tort as an intentional act.
As I stated in Rehm, 1996 SD 51 at ¶ 42, 547 N.W.2d at 569:
In the absence of fraudulent concealment or the continuing treatment rule, the lawsuit had to be commenced within two years, not three years, of the last act of negligence[.]