Kimberly Ann Miles, Petitioners v. Daniel Weingrad, M.d., Respondent

Summary

The Court held that it had conflict jurisdiction because the decision under review adopted a prior district-court ruling that expressly conflicted with another district-court decision on when a medical-malpractice cause of action accrues. It held that the cause of action accrued when the malpractice occurred, creating a vested substantive right that could not be impaired by retroactive application of the statutory noneconomic-damages cap. The Court quashed the decision below, disapproved the contrary rationale, and directed reinstatement of the original judgment. Justice Pariente concurred to defend jurisdiction, while Justice Canady, joined by Justice Polston, would have dismissed the review for lack of jurisdiction.