Adeyemi v. Guerrero
329 S.W.3d 241
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Guerrero gave birth after an epidural on Feb 21, 2008 at Dallas Regional Medical Center; soon after she developed a severe headache.
- Guerrero’s headache and vomiting continued; nurse suggested the headache was due to the epidural and a fall in labor/delivery, though no fall described in labor notes.
- Dr. Adeyemi’s progress notes mention a fall but no CT or neurological evaluation was ordered.
- By Feb 24 Guerrero suffered a seizure; CT scans revealed right parietal/frontal hematomas and her condition deteriorated.
- Guerrero underwent decompressive craniectomy and later faced left hemiparesis, dysarthria, dysphagia, and skull deformity requiring additional surgery.
- Guerrero sued Dallas Regional Medical Center and doctors, asserting negligent assessment/diagnosis and failure to order imaging or neurological consultation; expert reports by Nosnik and Strange were served under §74.351(a).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nosnik’s report causation analysis is nonconclusory | Nosnik’s causation discussion ties breach to delayed CT/neurology. | Nosnik’s causation is conclusory or insufficiently linked to the facts. | No error; causation addressed sufficiently. |
| Whether Nosnik is qualified to opine on standard of care | Nosnik has neurology expertise applicable to head-trauma care. | Nosnik’s specialty may be improper for obstetric head-injury care. | No error; Nosnik qualified to opine on standard of care. |
Key Cases Cited
- Palacios, 46 S.W.3d 873 (Tex. 2001) (establishes standard for sufficiency of expert reports under 74.351(b))
- Leland v. Brandal, 257 S.W.3d 204 (Tex.2008) (focuses on informing defendant and merit of claims in expert reports)
- Moore v. Sutherland, 107 S.W.3d 786 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2003) (causation need not be proven in full; report must link facts to conclusions)
- Fagadau v. Wenkstern, 311 S.W.3d 132 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2010) (rejects over-narrow critique of expert conclusions)
- Hayes v. Carroll, 314 S.W.3d 494 (Tex.App.-Austin 2010) (fair summary standard for causation opinions)
- Bowie Mem'l Hosp. v. Wright, 79 S.W.3d 48 (Tex.2002) (requires fair summary of expert opinion on causation)
- Larson v. Downing, 197 S.W.3d 303 (Tex.2006) (defines broad qualifications for experts)
- Broders v. Heise, 924 S.W.2d 148 (Tex.1996) (identifies test for expertise qualifications)