9 results for 'cat:"Negligence" AND cat:"Experts" AND cat:"Medical Malpractice"'.
J. Smith finds that the trial court properly ruled against a doctor's motion to dismiss a negligence case filed against her by the mother of a child who committed suicide a day after being discharged from the doctor's care. On appeal, the doctor argues that she is entitled to dismissal of the case because the mother's expert report "lacks any evidence" to show that the care she provided was negligent and subsequently led to the suicide. The expert report provides a sufficient summary of the facts and establishes a line of causation from the doctor's care to the suicide. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Smith, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 03-22-00177-CV, Categories: negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Goodman finds the lower court properly denied an anesthesiologist's motion to dismiss for failure to comply with the expert report requirements of the Texas Medical Liability Act. A mother sued the anesthesiologist, alleging negligence after administering an epidural during the birth of her son, resulting in a permanent brain injury to the child. But the mother failed to serve an amended expert report by the 30-day deadline, so the anesthesiologist entered a motion to dismiss. The lower court denied the motion, and the anesthesiologist argues it should have been granted because the lower court errantly granted the mother an extension, implying a deficiency in the expert report. The instant court agrees the extension was erroneously granted, but alone does not indicate an issue with the report, and on review finds the causation opinion in the original report to be adequate, and the expert qualified. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Goodman, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 01-23-00817-CV, Categories: negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Arterburn finds the trial court improperly granted summary judgment to a hospital on medical malpractice claims filed by a widow and estate administrator after her husband died following an emergency room visit. The husband died at home from coronary artery disease after the emergency room doctor diagnosed and treated him for a head injury incurred at work. The court improperly denied the wife's motion to compel and granted the hospital’s motion for a protective order. Though the court correctly received the doctor's affidavit, it improperly declined to receive the wife's expert's affidavit stating the hospital violated standards of care involving the husband's history of heart disease. Reversed in part.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Arterburn , Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: A-23-339, Categories: negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Cadish finds the county court properly ruled in favor of the surgeon in this medical malpractice suit. The patient sustained a femoral nerve injury during a hip replacement and filed this suit alleging negligence and lack of informed consent. Though the patient says that certain expert testimony containing legal fallacies should not have been allowed, a doctor stating the surgery was properly completed, and the injury happened incidentally is not a legal fallacy. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Cadish , Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 85163, Categories: negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Molaison finds that the trial court should not have denied an animal hospital's motion for summary judgment on a dog owner's claim that the dog was misdiagnosed. In this case, the dog owner's expert did not meet the statutory criteria because she did not graduate from an accredited school of veterinary medicine, was not licensed to practice veterinary medicine, and was not practicing veterinary medicine. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Molaison , Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 23-C-510, Categories: negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Bourliot finds that the trial court properly denied the healthcare parties' motion to dismiss a patient's medical malpractice suit over an alleged unnecessary surgery by a podiatrist to address her bunion. The patient's amended expert report was sufficient to meet statutory requirements as to applicable standards of care, the doctor's alleged breaches and the cause of the patient's injuries. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Bourliot, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00874-CV, Categories: negligence, experts, medical Malpractice