Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 34-18-8-1 (2026)
Commencement of action; complaint
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 1. Subject to IC 34-18-10 and sections 4 through 6 of this chapter, a patient or the representative of a patient who has a claim under this article for bodily injury or death on account of malpractice may do the following:
(1) File a complaint in any court of law having requisite jurisdiction.
(2) By demand, exercise the right to a trial by jury.
[Pre-1998 Recodification Citation: 27-12-8-1.]
As added by P.L.1-1998, SEC.13.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Goleski v. Fritz, 768 N.E.2d 889 (Ind. 2002).
Goleski v. Fritz, 768 N.E.2d 889 (Ind. 2002). “" Ind.Code § 34-18-8-1 (1998). A "patient" is "an individual who receives or should have received health care .”
Preferred Prof'l Ins. Co., & Hills Ins. Co. Inc. v. Crystal West, William West, & Ind. Dept. of Ins., Patient's Comp. Fund, 23 N.E.3d 716 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). “” Ind. Code § 34-18-8-1 . Therefore, we must determine whether the Wests fall within the scope of the MMA’s definition of a “patient” having a claim as a result of alleged malpractice.”
Shacare Terry v. Cmty. Health Network, Inc., 17 N.E.3d 389 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). “Ind.Code § 34-18-8-1. Indiana Code section 34-18-8-4 states, however, that “an action against a health care provider may not be commenced in a court in Indiana before: (1) the claimant’s proposed complaint has been presented to a medical review panel .”
Atterholt v. Robinson, 872 N.E.2d 633 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “2002) (citing Ind.Code § 34-18-8-1). The MMA was designed to curtail liability for medical malpractice.”
Robertson v. B.O. ex rel. Ort, 977 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 2012). “An injured plaintiff thus proceeds first against the healthcare provider, Ind.Code §§ 34-18-8-1 to -8 (2008), and then against the PCF, Ind.”
Lusk v. Swanson, 753 N.E.2d 748 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “The Act also provides that no action may be commenced in any court of this state before the claimant's proposed complaint has been presented to a medical review panel and the panel renders an opinion.”
Indiana Patient's Comp. Fund v. Butcher, 863 N.E.2d 11 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “Fritz">Goleski court sanctioned the outcome in Wolfe , but it disapproved of the Wolfe court’s rationale to the extent Wolfe suggested “that a derivative claimant is not a ‘patient’ for purposes of ability to assert a claim under [Indiana Code Section 34-18-8-1].” Id. The…”
Indiana Patient's Comp. Fund v. Winkle, 863 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “” Although we believe the Court of Appeals reached the correct result in Wolfe , we think that derivative claimants are “patients” within the meaning of section 34-18-8-1 but are not the patients upon whom “injury or death” is inflicted.”
Peters v. Cummins Mental Health, Inc., 790 N.E.2d 572 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “2001) (quoting Indiana Code Section 34-18-8-1). Pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-18-2-18, “malpractice” is a tort or breach of contract based on health care or professional services that were provided, or that should have been provided, by a health care provider, to a patient.”
Thomas v. Deitsch, 743 N.E.2d 1218 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “" Ind.Code § 34-18-8-1 (1998). "Malpractice" is defined as ".”
Linda Martinez, as the Pers. Rep. of the Est. of Roy Martinez v. Oaklawn Psychiatric Ctr., 128 N.E.3d 549 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “Ind. Code § 34-18-8-1 ; Terry v. Cmty. Health Network, Inc.”
B.R. ex rel. Todd v. State, 1 N.E.3d 708 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “"Malpractice" is defined as "a tort or breach of contract based on health care or professional services that were provided, or that should have been provided, by a health care provider, to a patient." I.C. § 34-18-2-18.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.