The North Carolina Court of Appeals recently upheld a lower court's dismissal of a veterinary malpractice case involving a dressage horse named Rolando. The court ruled that the plaintiff, Brooke Doss, filed her complaint too late, making it time-barred by the statute of limitations. This decision affects individuals who may seek to file malpractice claims against veterinarians, emphasizing the importance of timely legal action.

The case, Doss v. Maxwell, was filed under docket number 25-876 and heard by Judge Christopher Freeman. The ruling came after Doss appealed a decision made by Wake County Superior Court Judge George Robert Hicks III, who granted a motion to dismiss filed by the defendant, veterinarian William James Maxwell III, on April 28, 2025.

In her complaint, Doss alleged that Maxwell was negligent in treating Rolando, specifically by failing to properly supervise the disinfection of the injection site before administering spinal injections. After the injections, Doss noticed swelling at the injection site and subsequently took Rolando to a veterinary hospital, where the horse underwent surgery that ultimately led to his retirement from competition.

The dispute began when Doss filed her complaint on May 13, 2024, claiming that Maxwell's negligence caused significant harm to her horse. However, Maxwell's legal team argued that the complaint was time-barred, asserting that the statute of limitations had expired. This argument was central to the trial court's decision to dismiss the case.

During the trial court proceedings, Doss contended that the continuing course of treatment doctrine should apply, which would allow her to file her claim within three years of the last treatment. This doctrine is an exception to the general rule that a claim accrues at the time of the negligent act. However, the trial court found that the doctrine had not been applied in cases involving veterinary malpractice and ruled against Doss.

In its opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, stating, "The continuing course of treatment doctrine...has only been applied in physician-patient settings, and our appellate courts have not yet considered whether it applies to instances of alleged veterinary malpractice." The court emphasized that Doss's complaint did not sufficiently demonstrate a continuing relationship with Maxwell that would warrant the application of the doctrine.

The court also noted that Doss's claim accrued at the latest on May 7, 2021, when she first noticed the swelling on Rolando's back. Since she filed her complaint nearly three years later, the court ruled that her claim was indeed time-barred.

This ruling has significant implications for future veterinary malpractice claims in North Carolina. It reinforces the necessity for pet owners and horse owners to act promptly when they suspect negligence from veterinary professionals. The decision also clarifies the boundaries of the continuing course of treatment doctrine, indicating that it may not extend to veterinary care.

As a result of this ruling, pet owners may need to be more vigilant about the timeline for filing complaints and ensure they understand the legal standards that apply to veterinary malpractice cases. The court's decision serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to statutory deadlines in legal proceedings.

Looking ahead, Doss may have the option to appeal the decision to the North Carolina Supreme Court, although it is unclear if she will pursue this route. There are no related cases pending that would directly impact this ruling, but it may influence how future cases involving veterinary malpractice are handled in the state.