About Us
Supreme Court Clears State Roadblocks to Federal Court Access in Medical Malpractice Claims
The Court’s decision removes a procedural barrier often affecting older adults.
In January 2026, the Supreme resolved a circuit split over the applicability of onerous state requirements in medical malpractice claims—often brought by older adults—in federal court.
Decision: Berk v. Choy, 146 S. Ct. 536 (2026)
Holding: In a unanimous, 9-0 decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Supreme Court held that Delaware’s requirement that medical malpractice plaintiffs file an affidavit from a medical professional attesting to the merits of a plaintiff’s lawsuit conflicts with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and thus does not apply in federal court. Berk v. Choy, 146 S. Ct. 536, 556-57 (2026). The Court concluded that Rule 8 governs the sufficiency of a complaint in federal court and requires only a short and plain statement showing entitlement to relief, precluding the imposition of a conflicting state-law prerequisite. Id.
Implications
The Supreme Court’s decision promotes uniform federal practice and improves access to justice by eliminating a costly procedural barrier that can deter older adults, low-income plaintiffs, and pro se litigants from bringing meritorious medical malpractice claims in federal court. Preserving this right is essential to toll the statute of limitations while plaintiffs work to secure competent counsel to aid them with their claims.
Rachel N. Lokken, RLokken@aarp.org
2026 Supreme Court Preview
The Supreme Court often hears cases affecting the lives of people over 50. Read our review of key cases coming before the Court this year and likely to come in the future.