August 28, 2025

LOUISVILLE, KY HUB – QPWB has secured a complete defense victory for a skilled nursing facility and its affiliates in a medical negligence and wrongful death case in the Kentucky Circuit Court. The court granted the motion for summary judgment from Louisville Managing Partner Brandon Sword and Associate Megan Buechler, dismissing the Plaintiff's claims with prejudice due to failure to comply with a mandatory procedural requirement.

---

Overview of the Case

This was a medical negligence and wrongful death case brought by a resident's estate against a skilled nursing facility, its Administrator, its Medical Director, and various other defendants. The defense won the case on a motion for summary judgment after the Plaintiff's counsel failed to file a mandatory Certificate of Merit, as required by Kentucky law.

Key Difference-Makers:
● Brandon Sword – Managing Partner, Louisville Hub
● Megan Buechler - Associate, Louisville Hub

Administrative Support:
● Candida Sandlin – Paralegal
● Jolene Upton - Paralegal

Claims Made Against Our Client

The Plaintiff, the estate of a resident of the rehabilitation and nursing center, alleged that our client and various other defendants were negligent in the care and treatment of the resident. The Plaintiff asserted theories of negligence, medical negligence, corporate negligence, and wrongful death, all of which allegedly resulted in injury and ultimately, the death of the resident.

Defense Strategy The defense strategy was to focus on strict compliance with Kentucky's Certificate of Merit statute (KRS § 411.167), which is in effect to protect medical professionals from having to defend themselves against frivolous or nuisance lawsuits. The defense relied heavily on recent Kentucky Supreme Court case law, arguing that the statute's plain language and the legislature's intent require absolute compliance. While the

plaintiff's counsel relied on Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure 6.02 for an extension, the defense argued that "inadvertence" does not constitute "excusable neglect" as required by that rule, and that dismissal was warranted as a matter of law.

Impact on Final Outcome

At the time of filing, the plaintiff's counsel included an affidavit in lieu of a Certificate of Merit, stating they were unable to obtain the required consultation before the statute of limitations expired. The affidavit promised to supplement the filing within sixty days, but the plaintiff's counsel failed to do so.

The court agreed with the defense, finding that the plaintiff had failed to timely comply with the statute. Their decision was a clear endorsement of the defense’s argument, finding that a plaintiff's failure to file a proper Certificate of Merit due to mere "inadvertence" was not "good cause" for an extension. The court granted the motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims with prejudice.

Unique Aspects of the Case

The most unique aspect of this case was the plaintiff's counsel's reliance on both KRS § 411.167 and Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure 6.02 to argue for an extension of time. The court's explicit finding that "inadvertence" was not a valid reason for "excusable neglect" sets a powerful precedent for future cases. The court also noted that while it prefers to have cases tried on the merits, the defense’s arguments were too persuasive.

Predicting the Future

As Kentucky's Certificate of Merit statute is a relatively new law, this victory provides a crucial precedent for strict compliance. This win reinforces the legislative purpose of the statute: to protect healthcare providers from having to defend against potentially frivolous or unmerited claims. For future clients, this win provides additional legal authority for securing dismissals when plaintiffs fail to adhere to mandatory statutory requirements.

Key Actions in This Case:
● Motion for Summary Judgment: Achieved a complete dismissal with prejudice for failure to comply with a statute
● Emphasized Strict Statutory Compliance: Used Kentucky Supreme Court case law to prove that strict compliance with KRS § 411.167 is mandatory
● Set Legal Precedent: The court's ruling against "inadvertence" as a valid excuse provides valuable legal authority for future cases

---

About QPWB

Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A. is one of the fastest growing law firms in the United States providing a different focus on what it means to provide responsive service to clients and team members. With a national presence of 54 offices and a comprehensive scope of over 130 practice areas, QPWB delivers legal representation in litigation, regulatory, and corporate matters to a diverse range of industries. This scope and rapid expansion has attracted unique legal talent from all different backgrounds and experiences which has made them the largest minority-owned law firm in the country.