In the landmark case of Neidig v. Valley Health System, Case No. 24-27 (2025), the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia addressed a certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding the scope of the West Virginia Medical Professional Liability Act (MPLA). The central issue was whether the MPLA applies to lawsuits against healthcare providers when the plaintiff seeks only economic damages and explicitly disclaims any physical or emotional injury. The Court’s decision, issued on June 10, 2025, has significant implications for the boundaries of medical liability law in West Virginia, particularly in distinguishing between traditional malpractice claims and consumer protection or contract-based claims.
Elaine Neidig filed a class action lawsuit against Valley Health System after receiving mammograms at a facility later found to have serious image quality deficiencies. She alleged that the services were misrepresented and of lesser value than advertised. She sought only economic damages under consumer protection laws, unjust enrichment, and breach of contract—without claiming any physical or emotional injury.
The case was dismissed by the federal district court for failure to comply with the MPLA’s pre-suit requirements and statute of limitations. Neidig appealed, arguing that her claims were not subject to the MPLA because they involved no personal injury. The Fourth Circuit certified a question to the Supreme Court of Appeals asking whether the MPLA applies when a plaintiff disclaims all physical or emotional injury and seeks only economic damages.
In its decision, the Court reformulated the certified question to align with statutory language and focused on the definition of “medical professional liability” under W. Va. Code § 55-7B-2(i). It held that the MPLA applies only when a claim involves liability for damages resulting from the death or injury of a person. The Court rejected the argument that economic damages alone could trigger the MPLA, emphasizing that the statute’s language and legislative intent clearly tie its application to personal injury or death. The Court also noted that the MPLA’s procedural requirements, such as expert certification, are ill-suited for purely economic claims.
The West Virginia Supreme Court’s decision in Neidig v. Valley Health System clarified that the MPLA does not govern claims solely seeking economic damages without allegations of physical or emotional harm. This ruling draws a clear boundary between medical malpractice claims and consumer or contract-based disputes involving healthcare providers. For healthcare providers, this decision underscores the importance of understanding the legal context of claims brought against them, particularly when those claims arise from marketing or service quality representations rather than direct medical harm. Should you have any questions regarding this decision, please feel free to reach out to our West Virginia licensed attorneys.
