Malpractice: what is still at risk?
Brenda Neel Hight, JD
Recent Texas case law decisions have confirmed that the Medical Liability Act is working. The broader definition of health care provider and the expert report requirements have resulted in many plaintiffs losing their case without trial. In the last few years, numerous courts have continued to address several aspects of the Texas Medical Liability Act's scope:
- What is an adequate report under §74.351?
- When, if ever, can a plaintiff get around the 120-day report requirement?
- Is assault and battery a health care claim or not?
- Does the Medical Liability Act trump Rule 202 presuit investigations of potential claims?
Recent decisions have also affirmed that other aspects of Texas tort reform, under both the Medical Liability Act and the Texas Tort Claims Act, have made plaintiff prosecution of health care providers more difficult. For example, Texas courts have confirmed the heightened burden of proof and partial immunity in situations of Good Samaritans and physicians who are governmental employees.
This article reviews recent cases addressing the requirement for an adequate report under chapter 74 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as well as application of the reform's statutory cap and emergency health care provisions.
|
Baylor Intranet |
Baylor Portal