The Texas Supreme Court long has been conflicted about what constitutes an adequate medical-malpractice expert report — a document state law requires plaintiffs to file in a trial court shortly after suing a doctor. A recent decision reveals deep disagreement on the court about whether to grant time extensions to plaintiffs who file deficient expert reports.
Justice David Medina, in a Feb. 25 plurality opinion joined by Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson and Justice Nathan Hecht,explained in Eberhard Samlowski, M.D. v. Carol Wooten that the courtheard the case to determine under what circumstances a trial court might abuse its discretion when denying a 30-day time extension to a plaintiff to cure an inadequate expert report.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
