655.006(1)(a)(a) On and after July 24, 1975, every patient, every patient’s representative and every health care provider shall be conclusively presumed to have accepted to be bound by this chapter.

655.007655.007 Patients’ claims. On and after July 24, 1975, any patient or the patient’s representative having a claim or any spouse, parent, minor sibling or child of the patient having a derivative claim for injury or death on account of malpractice is subject to this chapter.

655.007 AnnotationThis chapter was inapplicable to a third-party claim based on contract in which no bodily injury was alleged. Northwest General Hospital v. Yee, 115 Wis. 2d 59, 339 N.W.2d 583 (1983).

655.007 AnnotationIn this section, “child” refers to a minor child. An adult child cannot assert a claim based on medical malpractice committed against the adult child’s parent. Ziulkowski v. Nierengarten, 210 Wis. 2d 98, 565 N.W.2d 164 (Ct. App. 1997), 95-1708.

655.007 AnnotationSection 893.55 (4) (f) makes the limits on damages applicable to medical malpractice death cases, but does not incorporate classification of wrongful death claimants entitled to bring such actions, which is controlled by this section. As such, adult children do not have standing to bring such an action. The exclusion of adult children does not violate the guarantee of equal protection. Czapinski v. St. Francis Hospital, Inc., 2000 WI 80, 236 Wis. 2d 316, 613 N.W.2d 120, 98-2437.

655.007 AnnotationA mother who suffers the stillbirth of her infant as a result of medical malpractice has a personal injury claim involving negligent infliction of emotional distress, which includes the distress arising from the injuries and stillbirth of her daughter, in addition to her derivative claim for wrongful death of the infant. That the sources of the mother’s emotional injuries cannot be segregated does not mean that there is a single claim of medical malpractice subject to the single cap for noneconomic damages. Pierce v. Physicians Insurance Co. of Wisconsin, 2005 WI 14, 278 Wis. 2d 82, 692 N.W.2d 558, 01-2710.

655.007 AnnotationUnder ss. 895.01 (1) (o) [now s. 895.01 (1) (bm)] and 895.04 (2), a wrongful death claim does not survive the death of the claimant. In a non-medical malpractice wrongful death case, under s. 895.04 (2), a new cause of action is available to the next claimant in the statutory hierarchy. In a medical malpractice wrongful death case, eligible claimants under this section are not subject to a statutory hierarchy like claimants under s. 895.04 (2). However, in a medical malpractice wrongful death case, adult children of the deceased are not listed as eligible claimants and are therefore not eligible because of the exclusivity of this section, as interpreted in Czapinski, 2000 WI 80. Lornson v. Siddiqui, 2007 WI 92, 302 Wis. 2d 519, 735 N.W.2d 55, 05-2315.

655.007 AnnotationThe plaintiff’s claim that the hospital staff failed to adequately search his wife upon her return to an inpatient psychiatric unit when she carried in a gun and ammunition she used to kill herself alleged negligence in the performance of custodial care, not medical malpractice governed by this chapter. While the decision to place the patient on the unit involved medical decisions made in the course of rendering professional medical care, the search itself was a matter of custodial care. The staff’s search was not the result of special orders nor did it involve the exercise of professional medical judgment. Snyder v. Injured Patients & Families Compensation Fund, 2009 WI App 86, 320 Wis. 2d 259, 768 N.W.2d 271, 08-1611.

655.007 AnnotationA tortfeasor’s insurer’s subrogation claim against the injured party’s doctor asserting that the doctor rendered unnecessary medical treatment for which the insurer is responsible amounts to an action for medical malpractice, which is governed by this chapter. Neither the tortfeasor nor the insurer are patients or patient’s representatives under this section and thus do not have standing to bring a malpractice claim. The application of this chapter to bar the insurer’s subrogation claim does not violate equal protection guarantees. Konkel v. Acuity, 2009 WI App 132, 321 Wis. 2d 306, 775 N.W.2d 258, 08-2156.

655.007 AnnotationThis chapter applies only to negligent medical acts or decisions made in the course of rendering professional medical care. To hold otherwise would exceed the bounds of the chapter and grant seeming immunity from non-ch. 655 suits to those with a medical degree. Plaintiff’s claims arose from the discriminatory provision of medical care. This chapter does not apply when the provider engages in discriminatory acts on the basis of a patient’s disability. Rose v. Cahee, 727 F. Supp. 2d 728 (2010).

655.009(2)(2) Medical expense payments. The court or jury, whichever is applicable, shall determine the amounts of medical expense payments previously incurred and for future medical expense payments.

655.009(3)(3) Venue. Venue in a court action under this chapter is in the county where the claimant resides if the claimant is a resident of this state, or in a county specified in s. 801.50 (2) (a) or (c) if the claimant is not a resident of this state.

655.009 AnnotationDiscretionary changes of venue under s. 801.52 are applicable to actions under this chapter. Hoffman v. Memorial Hospital of Iowa County, 196 Wis. 2d 505, 538 N.W.2d 627 (Ct. App. 1995), 94-2490.

655.01655.01 Forms. The director of state courts shall prepare and cause to be printed, and upon request furnish free of charge, such forms and materials as the director deems necessary to facilitate or promote the efficient administration of this chapter.

655.013(1)(1) With respect to any act of malpractice after July 24, 1975, for which a contingency fee arrangement has been entered into before June 14, 1986, the compensation determined on a contingency basis and payable to all attorneys acting for one or more plaintiffs or claimants is subject to the following unless a new contingency fee arrangement is entered into that complies with subs. (1m) and (1t):

655.013(1m)(1m) Except as provided in sub. (1t), with respect to any act of malpractice for which a contingency fee arrangement is entered into on and after June 14, 1986, in addition to compensation for the reasonable costs of prosecution of the claim, the compensation determined on a contingency basis and payable to all attorneys acting for one or more plaintiffs or claimants is subject to the following limitations: