Court Opinion

ID: 9719185
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:45:17.332206+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:05.004764
License: Public Domain

*140YANDE WALLE, Justice,
specially concurring.
I do not believe that a difference in professional opinion on the necessity for surgery can, as a matter of law, rise to the status of fraud sufficient to toll the statute of limitations. Absent fraud prohibiting discovery, NDCC § 28-01-18 establishes a maximum of six years from the time of the act of alleged malpractice within which the action must be commenced, regardless of whether or not the plaintiff has discovered malpractice. This action was commenced more than six years from the time of the alleged act of malpractice. Therefore, whether or not Wheeler should have known that the surgery was unnecessary before an expert told her so is immaterial. I concur in the majority opinion.