Wheeler v. Methodist Richardson Medical Center
Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-17-00332-CV (December 7, 2017)
Justices Lang-Meirs (opinion linked here), Brown, and Boatright
The standard for allowing a medical malpractice plaintiff a second c submit a qualifying expert report is “minimal” and “lenient.” Chapt the Civil Practice & Remedies Code requires a medical malpractice file a qualifying expert report within 120 days after the defendant’s filed. Plaintiffs in this case submitted their expert reports on time, defendants objected, arguing the reports were insufficient under th because they failed to address causation. They argued the reports w insufficient as to constitute “no report at all.” Plaintiffs requested extension under §74.351 to cure the alleged deficiency and submitt amended expert report in an effort to prove the deficiency was cura trial court found that, because the original reports completely omit essential element, they were so deficient as to constitute “no repor therefore denied the extension and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice.
The Dallas Court of Appeals disagreed. It held the trial court should err on the side of granting an extensio §74.351 and must grant the extension if the deficiencies in the report are curable. The trial court therefo its discretion in dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims.
