McCoy v. Western Baptist Hospital, 80-CA-1008-MR
| Decision Date | 17 April 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 80-CA-1008-MR,80-CA-1008-MR |
| Citation | 628 S.W.2d 634 |
| Parties | Lonnie Ray McCOY, Appellant, v. WESTERN BAPTIST HOSPITAL, Appellee. Lonnie Ray McCOY, Appellant, v. BAPTIST HOSPITALS, INC., Appellee. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
James M. Auser, Louisville, for appellant.
Henry O. Whitlow, William B. Byrd, Paducah, for appellee.
Before GANT, HOGGE and WHITE, JJ.
These actions were originally commenced as malpractice actions against the treating physician and the hospital involved in the professional care and services rendered to the appellant. The case against the treating physician having been disposed of, only the hospital remains. The actions were apparently brought to deliberately test the constitutionality of KRS 304.40-270, which provides:
Limitation on prayer for damages in malpractice action.-In any action for damages for malpractice, the ad damnum clause or prayer for damages in any pleading shall not recite any sum as alleged damages other than an allegation that damages are in excess of any minimum dollar amount necessary to establish the jurisdiction of the court; provided, however, that all parties shall have the right to advise the trier of fact as to what amounts are fair and reasonable as shown by the evidence.
In these actions, the appellant deliberately set out in his complaint, in both the ad damnum clause and prayer for damages, the total sum of $1,050,000, in direct contravention of the statute. The lower court dismissed the action against both defendants because of the violation of the statute and for other grounds relating to this appellee alone.
It is our opinion that KRS 304.40-270 is clearly unconstitutional as an invasion of the rule-making power of the courts, and in violation of §§ 27, 28 and 109 of the Constitution of Kentucky. The Supreme Court of Kentucky, although as dictum, has chosen to comment on this subject in the case of McGuffey v. Hall, Ky., 557 S.W.2d 401, 406 (1977), as follows:
As a passing caveat, however, and without implying any approval of the other unlitigated portions of the Act, we express deep misgivings with respect to § 3 (now KRS 304.40-270), which relates to procedure and appears clearly to invade the rule-making authority of the court.
With this caveat of the Supreme Court, we hold that KRS 304.40-270 is unconstitutional.
The orders of the lower court dismissing the actions were proper. The court's dismissal of appellant's first suit was proper because of his failure to comply with CR 10, and the dismissal of the second was proper because the statute of limitations had run.
Rule 10.01 states:
Rule 10.01 Caption; Names of Parties Every pleading shall have a caption setting forth the name of the court, the style of the action, the file number, and a designation as in Rule 7.01. In the complaint the style of the action shall include the names of all the parties, but in other pleadings it is sufficient to state the name of the first party on each side with an appropriate indication of other parties. (Emphasis added).
Although there are no Kentucky cases on this point, we believe that the rule must be construed to mean exactly what it says and that a complaint which does not include the names of all the parties in the caption, or style, does not comply with the rule. S...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coburn By and Through Coburn v. Agustin
...97 Idaho 859, 555 P.2d 399 (1976); Wright v. Du Page Hospital Association, 63 Ill.2d 313, 347 N.E.2d 736 (1976); McCoy v. Western Baptist Hospital, 628 S.W.2d 634 (Ky.App.1981); Sabatini v. Marcuz, 122 Mich.App. 494, 332 N.W.2d 512 (1983); Cardinal Glennon Memorial Hospital v. Gaertner, 583......
-
Zeier v. Zimmer, Inc.
...Holub, 381 So.2d 231, 237 (Fla.1980); Carson v. Maurer, 120 N.H. 925, 424 A.2d 825, 837, 12 A.L.R.4th 1 (1980); McCoy v. Western Baptist Hosp., 628 S.W.2d 634-35 (Ky.App.1981); Arneson v. Olson, 270 N.W.2d 125, 136-37 (N.D. 1978); Graley v. Satayatham, 74 O.O.2d 316, 343 N.E.2d 832, 836 (19......
-
Kuprion v. Fitzgerald
...court. O'Bryan v. Commonwealth, Ky., 634 S.W.2d 153 (1982); Combs v. Huff, Ky., 858 S.W.2d 160 (1993). See also McCoy v. Western Baptist Hospital, Ky.App., 628 S.W.2d 634 (1981). On the other hand, this court has recognized areas of apparently per se "impairment" when confronted with legisl......
-
Stewart v. William H. Jolly Plumbing Co., 87-CA-1312-MR
...notification requirements as essential to the preservation of the issue for review. 3 In other cases, such as McCoy v. Western Baptist Hospital, Ky.App., 628 S.W.2d 634 (1982), and Hummeldorf v. Hummeldorf, Ky.App., 616 S.W.2d 794 (1981), this Court notified the attorney general of the cons......