Medical Malpractice vs. Ordinary Negligence in Ohio: Why the Difference Matters

When someone is hurt at a hospital or other healthcare facility, it might initially appear to be a medical malpractice claim. But not every injury involving a hospital, doctor, nurse, or healthcare provider meets that standard. Sometimes, the case may only involve ordinary negligence. And that difference is more than a legal technicality.

Different types of claims can be subject to different filing deadlines, procedural requirements, and standards of proof. Getting the distinction wrong—or waiting too long to find out—could jeopardize an otherwise viable injury claim.

What Qualifies as a Medical Claim in Ohio?

Under Ohio law, a “medical claim” usually involves a claim against a healthcare provider that arises out of the medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a patient.

The Ohio Supreme Court has explained that both parts matter:

• The claim must involve one of the healthcare providers covered by the law; and
• The claim must arise from medical diagnosis, care, or treatment

The setting alone does not determine the type of injury case. An injury can happen inside or at a hospital without being medical malpractice.

At the same time, something that looks like a fairly ordinary accident—such as a fall or an injury with a wheelchair—can qualify as a medical claim if it is closely connected to medical treatment or requires professional medical skill.

Ohio courts have looked at questions such as:

• Was the patient receiving diagnosis, care, or treatment when the injury occurred?
• Was medical equipment being used as part of a medical procedure?
• Was the activity ordered as part of the patient’s treatment?
• Did the task require professional medical expertise or skill?

In other words, what occurred when the patient was injured can matter just as much as where the injury happened or who was involved.

Putting the Difference in Context

One of the biggest reasons to correctly identify a medical claim is the statute of limitations—the legal deadline for filing a lawsuit.

Ohio medical claims are generally subject to a one-year statute of limitations, although when that one-year period begins can depend on the circumstances. The state also imposes a four-year statute of repose in many medical-malpractice cases, which is a hard cap on when a claim may be brought.

By comparison, victims typically have two years for a bodily-injury claim that falls under ordinary negligence.

These varying deadlines can be highly consequential. They can even make the difference between being able to pursue a claim and losing that right.

• Someone who assumes an injury is an ordinary negligence case may believe they have more time than they actually do.
• If the claim is later determined to be medical malpractice, the shorter deadline could already have passed.
• The opposite can also occur (i.e., a person may assume that an injury connected to a hospital or healthcare provider is subject to medical malpractice rules when the conduct falls outside medical diagnosis, care, or treatment).

The safest approach is not to try to make that determination on your own, since a number of legal technicalities and interpretations can come into play.

Medical Malpractice and Ordinary Negligence Can Require Different Proof

Filing deadlines are just one factor to consider. What happened, and what type of evidence may be needed to prove it, are relevant as well.

• Most medical malpractice cases turn on professional medical standards of care—what a reasonably careful healthcare provider would have done under similar circumstances. Expert testimony is often needed to explain that standard and whether it was breached.
• Ordinary negligence is measured against the general duty to use reasonable care and may not require specialized medical testimony.

Deciding whether what went wrong requires professional medical knowledge and judgment or is something a person could evaluate without that specialized expertise played an important role in a recent Ohio appellate decision and illustrates how that difference can play out in an actual case.

Salvo-Hill Shows Why the Distinction Is Not Always Obvious

In Salvo-Hill v. University Hospitals Geauga Medical Center, 83-year-old Isabella Salvo was preparing to leave a hospital after being treated for back pain, COVID-19 pneumonia, and an infection. Her doctors had cleared her for discharge.

When hospital staff brought Isabella by wheelchair to her daughter’s car, a transporter attempted to move her from the wheelchair into the vehicle. During the transfer, Isabella went down to the pavement and suffered blunt impact injuries. She died one week later.

Her daughter filed wrongful death and survivorship claims against University Hospitals. The hospital argued, among other things, that the survivorship claim was a medical claim and therefore barred by Ohio’s one-year statute of limitations. It also argued that the plaintiff had failed to produce the expert evidence required for a medical-negligence claim.

The Eighth District Court of Appeals focused on the specific circumstances of Isabella’s injury. For example, she had already been medically cleared for discharge, the transfer to her daughter’s car was not part of a medical procedure, and the task did not require professional medical expertise or judgment.

The court therefore concluded that the transfer was too far removed from medical diagnosis, care, or treatment to qualify as a medical claim. The case, in the court’s view, involved ordinary negligence, and because of that, the expert testimony requirement associated with medical malpractice did not apply.

How Medical vs. Ordinary Negligence Could Look in Everyday Situations

Ohio courts have recognized that falls and transportation injuries can qualify as medical claims when they are sufficiently connected to medical treatment. But the facts of the particular case determine which rules apply.

Common healthcare situations where the Salvo-Hill distinction could also come into play include:

• Falls: A patient may slip in a hallway, fall in a bathroom, or trip over an unsafe condition that has little to do with medical treatment.
• Transfers and transportation: Moving someone from a bed to a wheelchair, through the hospital, or into a car may sometimes be a basic safety task rather than medical care.
• Unsafe equipment or surroundings: Broken chairs, loose handrails, cluttered walkways, or other hazards can lead to injuries that are unrelated to diagnosis or treatment.
• Staffing and discharge problems: Questions can also arise when too few people are available to help a patient move safely or when transportation arrangements are not handled properly.

None of those examples automatically falls into one category or the other. Context is everything.

That is also not to say that every medical malpractice or wrongful death case turns on a novel legal interpretation. Some are more “open-and-shut” than others and come down more directly to the facts—what happened, who was responsible, and whether the applicable standard of care was breached.

Do Not Wait to Find Out What Kind of Claim You Have

Injured patients and their families may not know which legal rules apply until an attorney has reviewed what happened.

An injury at a hospital might look like medical malpractice but legally qualify as ordinary negligence. Another injury that seems like a simple accident could be considered a medical claim because it arose directly from treatment or required professional medical judgment.

Waiting until you think you understand what type of case you have can mean losing valuable time under a deadline that may be shorter than you expected.

These are questions an attorney can help you answer if you suspect that medical negligence contributed to the injury or death of a loved one.