A state law didn't violate the Equal Protection Clause by failing to exempt the "legally incompetent" from a general two-year statute of limitations, the 11th Circuit has ruled.

The plaintiff, individually and on behalf of her husband, sued a dentist for malpractice after an untreated tooth infection and deep cleaning caused her husband to suffer a subdural empyema and brain damage.

The dentist argued that the claim was barred by Georgia's two- year statute of limitations for medical malpractice claims.

A U.S. District Court concluded that the failure to exempt the legally incompetent from the statute of limitations violated equal protection.

The 11th Circuit disagreed.

"[T]olling [in Georgia] is unavailable for the legally incompetent in cases of medical malpractice. ... The legally incompetent are generally permitted to toll actions until their legal incompetence passes, but may not toll in cases of medical malpractice. ...

"The Georgia legislature, concerned about the proliferation of medical malpractice suits and their adverse impact on the quality of healthcare, is lawfully permitted to fashion 'a partial solution to a far more general problem.' ... And it is not for this court to substitute its judgment for that of the Georgia legislature. Quite simply, there is a rational basis underlying Georgia's legislative scheme."

U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit. Deen v. Egleston, No. 09- 11458. Feb. 26, 2010. Lawyers USA No. 993-1661.