Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Sherrie Taylor, individually and as heir and representative of the estate of Ronald C. Taylor, deceased, brought suit against appellees Christus Spohn Health System d/b/a Christus Spohn Hospital Shoreline, Team Health Southwest, L.P., Arthur G. Wright Jr., M.D., Coastal Cardiology Association, Charles J. Schecter, M.D., and Raymond H. Graf, M.D. Taylor alleged that the death of her husband, Ronald, was due to appellees’ negligence in failing to manage and timely and accurately diagnose Ronald’s cardiac condition and in failing to perform tests necessary to diagnose and recognize Ronald’s condition. In compliance with Article 4590i, 13.01 of the Texas Civil Statutes, Taylor filed an expert report by James Watson, M.D., accompanied by Dr. Watson’s curriculum vitae. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss based on Dr. Watson’s expert report. The trial court granted their motion after a hearing. Taylor now brings this appeal alleging that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the motion to dismiss. Specifically, Taylor argues that she demonstrated the required good faith effort to show compliance with the requirements of Article 4590i, 13.01. Appellees respond that the report was conclusory and that it improperly grouped all the defendants together, thereby failing to specifically address the standard of care and breach of duty with respect to each defendant. HOLDING:Affirmed. When presented with an expert report, the trial court must determine whether it represents a good faith effort to comply with the statutory definition of expert report. The statute requires that the report include a fair summary of the expert’s opinions for each defendant. If the court finds that the report does not represent a good faith effort to comply with the statute, the court shall “grant a motion challenging the adequacy of [the] expert report.” Although an expert report does not need to marshal and present all the plaintiff’s proof of malpractice, it must include the expert’s opinion on each of the elements identified in the statute. Essentially, the report must: 1. inform the defendant of the specific conduct the plaintiff has called into question; and 2. provide a basis for the trial court to conclude that the claims have merit. A report that merely states the expert’s conclusions about each element (standard of care, breach, and causation) does not fulfill these purposes. Dr. Watson’s report said, in part, that Ronald’s death “would have been avoided had the patient undergone diagnostic cardiac imaging and cardiac catheterization prior to his demise, as should have been done, but was not done. The failure to diagnose and treat this condition was negligence by Dr. Wright (ER Physician), Team Health Southwest, L.P., Coastal Cardiology, Charles Schecter, M.D. (cardiologist), Raymond Graf, M.D. (cardiologist), and Spohn Hospital Shoreline Emergency Room, and that negligence was a proximate cause of the injury and death of Ronald Clayton Taylor.” This portion of the expert report fails to meet the standard because it is both conclusory in nature and fails to specify each defendant’s individual negligent conduct Dr. Watson names all six appellees as having failed to meet this standard of medical care. “Again, this portion of the report does not meet the statutory requirements for expert opinions, as Dr. Watson fails to address the standard of care for each defendant and how each defendant failed to meet such standard. He does not explain which defendant should have communicated information about Ronald’s condition, or to whom the information should have been directed, nor does he explain who should have been responsible for transmission of Ronald’s chart to cardiology.” OPINION:Garza, J.; Yanez, Rodriguez and Garza, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.