Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7 (2026)
Commencement of action while claim being considered by medical review panel
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 7. (a) Notwithstanding section 4 of this chapter, beginning July 1, 1999, a claimant may commence an action in court for malpractice at the same time the claimant's proposed complaint is being considered by a medical review panel. In order to comply with this section, the:
(1) complaint filed in court may not contain any information that would allow a third party to identify the defendant;
(2) claimant is prohibited from pursuing the action; and
(3) court is prohibited from taking any action except setting a date for trial, an action under IC 34-18-8-8 (or IC 27-12-8-8 before its repeal), or an action under IC 34-18-11 (or IC 27-12-11 before its repeal);
until section 4 of this chapter has been satisfied.
(b) Upon satisfaction of section 4 of this chapter, the identifying information described in subsection (a)(1) shall be added to the complaint by the court.
As added by P.L.111-1998, SEC.9.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1999–2026 · leading case: Kho v. Pennington, 875 N.E.2d 208 (Ind. 2007).
Kho v. Pennington, 875 N.E.2d 208 (Ind. 2007). “We granted transfer to address one issue: whether violation of the defendant identity confidentiality provision of Indiana Code § 34-18-8-7 in the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act may give rise to an action for damages.”
Schriber v. Anonymous, 848 N.E.2d 1061 (Ind. 2006). “n two years of the plaintiff’s decedent’s death, but more than two years after the alleged malpractice, the plaintiff filed a proposed complaint with the Indiana Department of Insurance pursuant to the Medical Malpractice Act, and on April 25, 2002, she filed her second amended…”
Popovich v. Danielson, 896 N.E.2d 1196 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “Accordingly, Popovich's complaint should have complied with the anonymity provision of Ind.Code § 34-18-8-7, which permits a claimant to commence an action in court while the proposed complaint is being considered by the medical review panel but requires the complaint “not…”
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 § 34-18-8-7 . 3 pain medication, all of which caused the accident that injured Crystal.”
Hubbard v. Columbia Women's Hosp. of Indianapolis, 807 N.E.2d 45 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “Indiana Code Section 34-18-8-7, entitled "Commencement of action while claim being considered by medical review panel," provides in pertinent part as follows: Notwithstanding section 4 of this chapter, beginning July 1, 1999, a claimant may commence an action in court for…”
Thomas Haggerty & Cathy Haggerty v. Anonymous Party 1, Anonymous Party 2, & Anonymous Party 3, 998 N.E.2d 286 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “See Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7 ; Hubbard v. Columbia Women’s Hosp.”
In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litig., 162 F. Supp. 3d 953 (N.D. Cal. 2016). “2007), where the Indiana Supreme Court recognized a private right of action for statutory negligence “arising from the violation of the identity confidentiality provision in Indiana Code § 34-18-8-7(a)(l).” There are two key flaws with Plaintiffs’ reliance on Kho .”
Rangel v. Reynolds, 607 F. Supp. 2d 911 (N.D. Ind. 2009). “” Ind.Code § 34-18-8-7. Helpful to this case is Chief Judge Miller’s recent opinion in Estate of Rice ex rel.”
Kho v. Pennington, 846 N.E.2d 1036 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Private action 10 for violation of Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7 When a civil cause of action is premised on violation of a duty imposed by statute, the initial question to be deter *1047 mined is whether the statute in question confers a private right of action.”
Hamilton v. Ashton, 846 N.E.2d 309 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “See Ind.Code § 34-18-8-7. 3 . Because the entry of summary judgment for the Hospital disposed of all claims against the Hospital, that order was a final order and Hamilton initiated an appeal by merely filing a Notice of Appeal.”
Ann L. Miller & Richard A. Miller v. Glenn L. Dobbs, D.O., & Partners in Health, 976 N.E.2d 91 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). “” Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7 (a). Notably, the complaint the Millers filed in court identified both the Defendants by name.”
Howard Reg'l Health Sys. v. Gordon Ex Rel. Gordon, 925 N.E.2d 453 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “Because we find the spoliation claim is outside the coverage of the Medical Malpractice Act, we need not address Gordon's alternative argument the trial court could hear it pursuant to Ind.Code § 34-18-8-7 as a preliminary determination of an affirmative defense or issue of law…”
— Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7(1) — 1 case
Bonnie Shipley v. Anonymous Doctor A & Anonymous Hosp. C (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).
— Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7(a) — 3 cases
Ann Rachelle Johnson v. Dr. A., Dr. B., & Med. Provider, 973 N.E.2d 623 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).
Linda Gierek v. Anonymous 1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023).
Linda Gierek v. Anonymous 1 (Ind. 2025).
— Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7(a)(1) — 5 cases
Kho v. Pennington, 875 N.E.2d 208 (Ind. 2007). “We granted transfer to address one issue: whether violation of the defendant identity confidentiality provision of Indiana Code § 34-18-8-7 in the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act may give rise to an action for damages.”
Howard Reg'l Health Sys. v. Gordon Ex Rel. Gordon, 925 N.E.2d 453 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “Because we find the spoliation claim is outside the coverage of the Medical Malpractice Act, we need not address Gordon's alternative argument the trial court could hear it pursuant to Ind.Code § 34-18-8-7 as a preliminary determination of an affirmative defense or issue of law…”
Kolozsvari v. Doe, 943 N.E.2d 823 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
Caywood v. Anonymous Hosp., 856 F. Supp. 2d 1001 (S.D. Ind. 2012).
Linda Gierek v. Anonymous 1 (Ind. 2025).
— Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7(a)(3) — 2 cases
Linda Gierek v. Anonymous 1 (Ind. 2025).
— Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7(a)(l) — 3 cases
Kho v. Pennington, 875 N.E.2d 208 (Ind. 2007). “We granted transfer to address one issue: whether violation of the defendant identity confidentiality provision of Indiana Code § 34-18-8-7 in the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act may give rise to an action for damages.”
In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litig., 162 F. Supp. 3d 953 (N.D. Cal. 2016). “2007), where the Indiana Supreme Court recognized a private right of action for statutory negligence “arising from the violation of the identity confidentiality provision in Indiana Code § 34-18-8-7(a)(l).” There are two key flaws with Plaintiffs’ reliance on Kho .”
Popovich v. Danielson, 896 N.E.2d 1196 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “Accordingly, Popovich's complaint should have complied with the anonymity provision of Ind.Code § 34-18-8-7, which permits a claimant to commence an action in court while the proposed complaint is being considered by the medical review panel but requires the complaint “not…”
— Ind. Code § 34-18-8-7(b) — 1 case
Hubbard v. Columbia Women's Hosp. of Indianapolis, 807 N.E.2d 45 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “Indiana Code Section 34-18-8-7, entitled "Commencement of action while claim being considered by medical review panel," provides in pertinent part as follows: Notwithstanding section 4 of this chapter, beginning July 1, 1999, a claimant may commence an action in court for…”
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.