Does the Health Care Malpractice Act toll the Governmental Immunity Act's statute of limitations? Schleger v. State Explained

The Utah Court of Appeals in Schleger v. State addressed a critical timing issue for practitioners handling medical malpractice claims against governmental entities. The case illustrates the challenging intersection between the Governmental Immunity Act (GIA) and the Utah Health Care Malpractice Act (HCMA).

Background and Facts

Gary and Pamela Schleger’s daughter died by suicide while a patient at Utah State Hospital in May 2013. The Schlegers filed their GIA notice of claim on May 21, 2014—the last possible day within the one-year filing period. When the State failed to respond, the claim was deemed denied on July 20, 2014. However, the Schlegers did not begin the HCMA’s prelitigation claims-review process until May 2015, nearly ten months after their GIA claim was deemed denied. They received their certificate of compliance in January 2016 and filed suit in March 2016—well beyond the GIA’s one-year limitations period for commencing actions.

Key Legal Issues

The central question was whether the HCMA’s tolling provision in section 78B-3-416(3)(a)(i) suspends the GIA’s statute of limitations during prelitigation review proceedings. The Schlegers argued that without such tolling, it would be “impossible” to comply with both statutory schemes simultaneously.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court of appeals applied the correctness standard to this question of statutory interpretation. The court found dispositive language in HCMA section 78B-3-415, which provides that the HCMA “may not” affect the GIA’s requirements for filing notices of claims or commencing actions. The court noted that “may not” means an action is prohibited under Utah Code section 68-3-12(1)(h). Despite acknowledging the “daunting” timeline this creates, the court concluded the Legislature intended to preserve the State’s benefit of the GIA’s strict limitations period.

Practice Implications

The court provided helpful guidance through timeline charts demonstrating that compliance with both acts is possible but requires immediate action. Practitioners can pursue GIA and HCMA requirements simultaneously rather than sequentially. The key is beginning HCMA procedures immediately after the GIA claim is denied, allowing approximately 210 days to complete prelitigation review within the one-year filing deadline. This decision reinforces the importance of prompt action and careful timeline management when handling medical malpractice claims against governmental entities.