Christus Spohn Health System Corp. v. Hernandez, 04-15-00812-CV (4th COA. 04/27/2016)
Appellee sued appellant alleging the hospital's negligence contributed to the injuries she sustained when she was sexually assaulted by one of the hospital's nurses. In a prior appeal, the court of appeals held the trial court erred in denying appellee's request for an extension of time to cure her expert report after the hospital initially challenged the report provided. After the cause was remanded, appellee filed a supplemental expert report which was again challenged. In this appeal, the hospital challenges the trial court's order denying its motion to dismiss asserting the trial court abused its discretion as the expert report did not provide any opinion as to causation in accordance with Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code §74.351. The court of appeals now reverses the trial court's order and rendered judgment dismissing appellee's claims as the expert report was insufficient. When presented with a motion to dismiss a healthcare liability claim, the court must determine whether the expert report "represents a good-faith effort to comply with the statutory definition of an expert report." Bowie Mem'l Hosp. v. Wright, 79 S.W.3d 48, 52 (Tex. 2002) The statute defines an expert report as one written by an expert expressing his opinions regarding the standards of care and the causal relationship between that failure and the injury claimed. Here, the court of appeals held the expert report failed to make reference to the applicable standards of car or the manner in which those actions breached such standard. Because the report does not reference any alleged breaches of care, the report could not causally link those breaches to appellee's injuries. Accordingly, the trial court abused its discretion in denying appellant's motion to dismiss.
Christus Spohn Health System Corp. v. Melissa Hernandez, San Antonio Court of Appeals, Case No.: 04-15-00812-CV, 04/27/2016
June 10, 2016 at 12:00 AM