Narrative Opinion Summary
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin reviewed a case involving a plaintiff who sought to pursue a claim against a hospital for injuries sustained in 1947, before the abolition of charitable immunity in 1961. The plaintiff argued that his cause of action should be considered accrued after reaching the age of majority, as he was not legally competent to sue during his minority. However, the court held that the claim accrued at the time of the injury and was not altered by subsequent changes in the law. The statute in question, Sec. 893.33, suspends the limitation period for minors but does not create new rights or alter accrued claims. Furthermore, the court adhered to the principle established in Kojis v. Doctors Hospital, applying the elimination of charitable immunity prospectively to avoid imposing unforeseen liabilities on charitable organizations. Consequently, the judgment in favor of the defendant hospital was affirmed, upholding the trial court's original decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Accrual of Cause of Actionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that the plaintiff's cause of action accrued at the time of injury, despite legal restrictions on his ability to initiate the lawsuit during his minority.
Reasoning: The court noted that his claim had already accrued at the time of the injury, despite the legal restrictions on his ability to sue.
Prospective Application of Abolishing Charitable Immunitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied the rule abolishing charitable immunity prospectively, in line with established policy to prevent unexpected liabilities on institutions.
Reasoning: The court reiterated the policy established in Kojis v. Doctors Hospital, which maintained that the new rule abolishing charitable immunity should apply prospectively to prevent unfair liabilities on charitable institutions that had not anticipated such risks.
Statutory Suspension of Limitation Periods for Minorssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The statute suspends the limitation period for minors but does not retroactively alter legal outcomes based on changes in the law when they reach majority.
Reasoning: The relevant statute, Sec. 893.33, maintains that the time limit for commencing an action is suspended for individuals under 21, but it does not retroactively alter the legal consequences based on the status of the law at the time of reaching majority.