Berk v. Choy (24-440)

argument 24-440

Berk v. Choy

Supreme Court of the United States 1h 3m 8 speakers 8 chapters transcribed 1 month ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the core dispute between Delaware’s medical‑malpractice affidavit rule and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure?

Unknown 0:00

We are on the city. Burke versus Choi. Mr. Tutt? Thank you, Mr Chief Justice, and may it please the court. Delaware law provides that no medical malpractice complaint may even be docketed. Unless it is accompanied by an expert affidavit. That requirement conflicts with more than a half dozen federal rules of civil procedure. It conflicts with rules eight and nine. which set forth what a plaintiff must do to state a claim in federal court. It conflicts with Rule eleven, which bars verification of affidavit requirements unless a federal rule or statute provides otherwise. Given its unavoidable conflicts with multiple federal rules, Delaware's law cannot apply in federal court. Seeing that these conflicts are insurmountable, respondents seek refuge in Rule 11A, which says a pleading need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit, quote,

Unknown 0:56

unless a rule or statute specifically states otherwise, close quote. They say statute in that proviso means state statute. But context matters and respondents ignore it. A mountain of context confirms that the word statute in Rule eleven A refers to federal laws, not state laws. The rules text, context, history and purpose make respondents' Rule eleven A argument impossible. Rule eleven was meant to abolish, not preserve, a patchwork of state affidavit rules like Delaware's. Under respondents reading Rule eleven abolished, nothing at all. Respondents call Delaware's rule substantive, but Delaware's law is procedural from tip to tail. It designates when a complaint can be docketed, what it must say. And when the defendant must file a responsive pleading.

Unknown 1:48

It doesn't define malpractice or alter alter any substantive standard of care. By its terms it applies to all malpractice actions in Delaware, regardless of the state whose law governs the claim. And by its terms it does not apply to malpractice actions brought up under Delaware law in the courts of other states. This is a procedural law. The federal rules form a comprehensive scheme. for the fast, fair, efficient resolution of cases in federal courts. Delaware's law cuts an ugly gash through that scheme. It has no place in federal court. I welcome the court's questions.

Clarence Thomas 2:23

Uh was there a motion to dismiss file in this case?

Unknown 2:27

Um There wa there was not. I th this was th there w there was a motion to show cause um in this case, at least on the on the um affidavit of merit issue.

Clarence Thomas 2:40

Is that the way uh is that normal under federal rules of civil procedure?

Unknown 2:45

Uh it is it is not. It is not the traditional way in which a c uh case is is uh uh complaints sufficiency is tested or a case's legal sufficiency is tested. Um but it is authorized by the Delaware law. So the motion was made pursuant to Delaware's law which permits a party to seek in camera review to to ask the court to look at the affidavit of merit and determine whether it is sufficient. So that was the motion that was made by all defendants and that uh the court then looked at the affidavit and determined it was insufficient. um because it uh the it did not actually include an affidavit.

Clarence Thomas 3:25

So wouldn't it be hand wouldn't this have been disposed of in a different manner had uh this not been Delaware or a state that had a similar uh requirement?

Unknown 3:35

Yeah, this this case would have would have proceeded instead to uh continue to expert discovery um where uh Mr. Burke would have been required to then uh have his expert testimony disclosed and go through the process of

Elena Kagan 3:50

of discovery on extra. Why couldn't they have just made either a motion to dismiss and asked for it to be converted into a motion for summary judgment. um if an affidavit wasn't provided. Um They they had Yeah, yes, Your Honor. Than what the federal rules set forth.

Unknown 4:19

created by the statute to facilitate the procedure created by the statute.

Elena Kagan 4:24

Can I talk to you about um I know you have a bunch of different rules that you say this um uh violates uh three, eight, nine, eleven, I don't know, twelve. Um But The essence of all those rules is that the federal rules require a concise and precise statement of your claim.