National Health Law Moot Court Competition

Request for Clarification # 1: Since we are in a fictitious State and County, is there any clarification on which jurisdictions serve as binding authority? In other words, the Problem cites precedent from the State of Shawnee and obviously those statutes, regulations, and/or caselaw is binding along with the SCOTUS opinions; however, is there any clarification on which circuit the State of Shawnee is located? Or, are we to presume that all other legal citations are merely persuasive?

Response: We have purposely not provided clarification on what circuit/geographic area the State of Shawnee sits in. Therefore, all case law is persuasive. However, as in the case of first impressions in real state courts, if you find cases based on a statute that is similar to the statute in Shawnee, cases from that state would be more persuasive.

Request for Clarification # 2: Whether the steel mill or a dominant assembly plant closed in 2003. The fact pattern states that the steel mill closed in 2003 but he worked there until 2016.

Response: That is a mistake in the problem. Those two events happened in the same year: 2016. The problem has been amended to state that the mill closed in 2016 and Mr. Miller retired in the same year.

Request for Clarification # 3: Respondent claims unenforceable contract of adhesion, which is a whole analysis of itself to determine if a contract is one of adhesion as opposed to if there was procedural unconscionability. Should competitors address a separate analysis of whether it was a contract adhesion?

Response: A contract of adhesion is a different, but related, inquiry into whether a contract is enforceable. Some jurisdictions analyze adhesion contracts as a key element of whether there is procedural unconscionability, but adhesion alone does not render a contract unenforceable.

Request for Clarification # 4: Is it possible if we could be provided with the following statutes: § 12-404 and § 12-410?

Response: Yes. We have included the full text of those statutes as well as Shawnee Revised Statute § 12-402 below. These statutes will be added into the record as an appendix to the Circuit Court of Simmons County’s opinion.

Shawnee Rev. Stat. § 12-402. Limitations of Actions: Personal Injury and Wrongful Death; Discovery Rule.

1. Personal Injury. Except as otherwise provided in this section, and except as provided in section 12-404 of this chapter, an action for damages for personal injury caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of another shall be commenced within two (2) years after the cause of action accrues.
2. Wrongful Death. An action for wrongful death shall be commenced within two (2) years from the date of the decedent’s death.
3. Discovery Rule Exception. If the injury or its causal relationship to the conduct of another is not immediately discoverable through the exercise of reasonable diligence, the limitation period shall not begin to run until the claimant knows, or reasonably should have known, of the injury and the tortfeasor’s identity.

Shawnee Rev. Stat. § 12-404. Limitations – Health Care Malpractice.

1. Limitations Period. No action for damages for injury or death against any physician, hospital, or healthcare provider arising out of patient care shall be brought more than two (2) years after the date on which the claimant knew, or through reasonable diligence should have known, of the injury or death.
2. Repose Period. In no event shall such action be brought more than four (4) years after the date on which occurred the act or omission or occurrence alleged to have been the cause of such injury or death. However, such period shall not bar an action where the defendant healthcare provider engaged in a continuous course of treatment of the patient for the same illness, injury, or condition that gives rise to the claim of negligence.

Shawnee Rev. Stat. § 12-410. Statute of Repose – Product Liability.

1. Repose Period. No product liability action based on strict liability in tort shall be commenced except within the applicable limitations period in Section 12-402, and in any event, within four (4) years from the date of first sale, lease, or delivery of possession to its initial user or consumer.
2. Exceptions to Statute of Repose. The four (4) year period of repose shall not apply if:
   1. The product seller expressly warrants that its product can be utilized safely for a period longer than four (4) years;
   2. The product seller intentionally misrepresents facts about its product, or fraudulently conceals information about it; or
   3. The harm was caused by prolonged exposure to a defective product, or if the injury-causing aspect of the product that existed at the time of delivery was not discoverable by an ordinary reasonably prudent person until more than four (4) years after delivery.

Request for Clarification # 5: What is Mr. Miller's age?

Response: Mr. Miller was 20 years old when he started working at the steel mill in 1970. That means he was born in 1950 and would have been 74 years old when he died.

Request for Clarification # 6: Because we are appearing before the Shawnee Supreme Court rather than the U.S. Supreme Court, could you clarify which jurisdiction’s decisions constitute binding precedent? The problem cites cases from numerous jurisdictions, and I would like to make sure I understand which authorities will be considered binding, and which will be persuasive for the purposes of our brief.

Response: See Response to Request for Clarification # 1 above.

Request for Clarification # 7: Will we receive an appendix of the Shawnee statutes?

Response: Yes. See Response to Request for Clarification # 4 above.

Request for Clarification # 8 : To address the limitation to file wrongful death suits under § 12-402; the lower court says it is timely, but the higher court says they have two years to file it. Which is it?

Response: See the text of the statute in Response to Request for Clarification # 4 above. The courts are interpreting the statute, and how it applies in this case, differently.

Request for Clarification # 9: Can the competition please provide the full text of the Shawnee statutes and Shawnee Rules of Civil Procedure referred to in both the Circuit and Appellate Court decisions?

Response: Yes. See Response to Request for Clarification # 4 above.

Request for Clarification # 10: Could the competition please provide clarification on the specific dates within each month and year referenced, in order to ensure a precise and accurate representation of the facts?

Response: We have provided specific dates for several facts.

Request for Clarification # 11: Did CCS retrain Cyber MD and release their updated version before or after October 2023, when Mr. Miller's lesion, which Cyber MD's 2017 baseline coding algorithm had failed to identify, was discovered (see Point 18 of the Circuit Court Opinion, page R0005)?

Response: CCS started retraining Cyber MD in October 2022. It released the updated version to clients on December 13, 2023, almost two months after Mr. Miller was hospitalized on October 30, 2023.

Request for Clarification # 12: Were any of Cyber MD's statistics, including its accuracy rate and subsequent drops, or its defect discovery (as referenced in Point 14 of the Circuit Court Opinion, page R0004) made available or announced to the public? If so, could the details of these reports or announcements please be provided?

Response: The verification studies and data that CCS used to train Cyber MD were provided to the FDA prior to its 2017 approval. However, CCS did not provide this information to the public. Nor did CCS provide the public with the information it discovered in 2022 that led to it retraining Cyber MD (that Cyber MD’s diagnostic accuracy dropped to 85% when evaluating images of patients with prior occupational asbestos exposure).

Request for Clarification # 13: Referring to point 18 in the Circuit Court opinion facts section (bottom of page R0005), how do we know that Mr. Miller’s lesion measured 47 mm in 2022? No other facts indicate that he saw the AI after 2021, and there’s no record of any other medical visits between 2021 and 2023, when he suffered a spontaneous pneumothorax in October 2023.

Response: That is a mistake in the problem. The problem has been amended to change that date from 2022 to 2021.

Request for Clarification # 14: The timeline of the coal plant: On p.2 of the record, in ¶ 1, it mentions Mr. Miller was employed at the steel mill in Cartersville until his retirement in 2016. Then, on p.3 of the record in ¶ 6, it mentions "the 2003 closure of the steel mill." Was the still mill in fact closed in 2003, and if so, where did Miller work after it closed until his retirement?

Response: See Response to Request for Clarification # 2 above.

Request for Clarification # 15: For the sake of clarity, does the pop-up box mentioned in ¶ 16 on p.4 of the record appear before each chat session, or only before the first?

Response: The pop-up box mentioned on ¶ 13 on page R0004 of the record appears each time a patient logs on.

Request for Clarification # 16: Can we have the full text of §§ 12-404 and 12-410 of the Shawnee Revised Statutes?

Response: Yes. See Response to Request for Clarification # 4 above.

Request for Clarification # 17: Is a contract law in Shawnee similar to NY or California contract law cited in Berman?

Response: That is for you to decide. Since this is an issue of first impression, the lower courts have made decisions about which cases they feel are analogous and persuasive. At the Shawnee Supreme Court, you are free to argue otherwise.

Request for Clarification # 18: Can we see the statutes at issue that the court is referring to in the statutes of repose section?

Response: See Response to Request for Clarification # 4 above.

Request for Clarification # 19: What was the color of the hyperlink? Was it blue? Can we get some more details about the hyperlink in connection to the rest of the page?

Response: It looked like a standard hyperlink. For example,

By entering the portal, I accept the MHS Terms and Conditions.

Note that we will be sending each team two documents via email: (1) a final version of the problem incorporating any necessary changes; (2) a track changes version of the problem so that teams can see precisely what changes have been made.