For any ODGer feeling a compulsion to geek out on statutes of limitations arcana:

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court adopted the continuing treatment exception to the state medmal limitations period (three years) and reasonable discovery rule in Parr v. Rosenthal, published today, http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/sjc/reporter-of-decisions/new-opinions/12014.pdf.  The opinion offers a worthwhile review of the language and standards of Mass. common law interpretation of the statutory limitations periods.

Bonus tracks include (1) the problem of a minor plaintiff; (2) interaction with statutes of repose; (3) role of the jury in fact-finding; and (4) a dissent (from p. 37) that doesn't necessarily disagree with the rationale but thinks the upset to settled common law invaded the policy-making prerogative of the legislature.

Saliently for the litigants, the Court ruled that the limitations period ran despite operation of the continuing treatment doctrine, because the doctrine ceased to operate when the defending physician left the treatment team.

Happy Labo(u)r Day weekend in North America, September to all.

rick