York County Medicine Spring 2021 - 18

YO R K C O M E D S O C . O R G

IN THE NEWS:

Superior Court
Issues Decision in Medical
Liability Venue Case
Last Updated: Feb 23, 2021
On Feb. 22, 2021, the Pennsylvania Superior Court issued a
decision in the case of Dockery v. Thomas Jefferson University
Hospitals, Inc., et al. upholding the trial court's order to transfer
a medical professional liability case out of Philadelphia County
and thereby also upholding the existing venue rule and statute for
medical professional liability actions.

Background of Case
In this case, plaintiffs filed a medical professional liability
action against defendants in Philadelphia County. Defendants
filed preliminary objections arguing that the proper venue for this
case was in Delaware County.
The current venue rule and statute provides that such actions
may be brought against a health care provider for a medical
professional liability claim only in the county in which the
cause of action arose. In its decision, the Philadelphia Court
of Common Pleas noted that both the statute and judicial rule
regarding venue are constitutional. As to the statute (42 Pa.C.S.
§ 5101.1), the court found that the statute promotes a legitimate
state interest of providing a high-quality health system for
Pennsylvania residents and also ensures that medical professional
liability insurance is obtainable at a reasonable cost.
As to the judicial rule (Pa. R.C.P. 1006(a)(1)), the court
found that the rule was enacted to control the reach and scope
of existing venue rules. As such, the court found that both the
statute and the court rule do not violate constitutional guarantees
of a free and open court system.
The plaintiffs subsequently filed an appeal to the Superior
Court. The plaintiffs argued that both the statute and the rule
are unconstitutional.
Reviewing the plaintiffs' arguments, the Superior Court
ultimately found that the plaintiffs did not properly mount a
18

York County Medicine | S P R I N G 2 0 2 1

constitutional attack against the venue rule. The Court concluded
that the plaintiffs failed to contend that the Supreme Court
of Pennsylvania lacked any reasoned basis for discriminating
against medical-malpractice plaintiffs on the question of venue.
Because the plaintiffs' challenge to the Rule failed, the case had
to be transferred out of Philadelphia County per the venue rule's
requirements and the Court did not need to address the merits of
the rule's constitutionality.

What does this decision mean for venue?
* The current venue rule and statute, which provides that suits
may only be filed in the county in which the alleged act of
malfeasance occurred, remains intact and unchanged.
* There is no effect on the venue rule as a result of this
decision. Obtainment of professional liability insurance will
remain unchanged.
* Plaintiffs will not be able to transfer cases to more plaintifffriendly venues as a result of this decision.

PAMED Advocacy
On July 8, 2020, the Pennsylvania Coalition for Civil
Justice Reform (PCCJR), of which the Pennsylvania Medical
Society (PAMED) is a health care member, filed an amicus brief
in support of the existing venue rule for medical professional
liability actions.
You can read a copy of PCCJR's amicus brief here.
PAMED will continue to stay actively involved in this case
and will provide updates to its members as they occur.
To learn more about PAMED's ongoing advocacy in
support of the current venue rule, visit www.pamedsoc.
org/venuerule.

http://www.YORKCOMEDSOC.ORG http://www.pamedsoc http://www.pamedsoc. org/venuerule

York County Medicine Spring 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of York County Medicine Spring 2021