Ana Maria Gonzalez Salais, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Ruben Gonzalez v. Mexia State School, Texas Department of Aging & Disability Services, and Humane Restraint. Inc.
10-14-00152-CV
| Tex. App. | Nov 5, 2015Background
- Plaintiff Ana Maria Salais sued Mexia State School and TDADS alleging health-care liability related to Ruben Gonzalez’s death; the case underwent multiple appeals addressing expert-report sufficiency.
- Initial appeal: paramedic James Wohlers’s report on standard of care was adequate; Dr. Donald Winston’s causation report was substantively adequate but lacked proof of his qualifications to opine on causation.
- Appellate court remanded for the trial court to rule on Salais’s motion for a 30-day extension to cure Winston’s qualification deficiency; the trial court initially denied the extension and dismissed the health-care claim, which was reversed on appeal and remanded to grant a 30-day extension.
- The trial court’s extension set a new deadline of July 27, 2013 (with three extra days for notice); Salais contends she did not receive notice until August 14, 2013, and then learned Dr. Winston had died in 2010.
- Salais sought additional time to locate a new causation expert; she served a substitute expert report from paramedic Bruce Taylor on February 4, 2014, but the trial court found it untimely and dismissed the claim. Taylor was not qualified to opine on causation for this claim.
- The appellate court affirmed dismissal, holding Salais failed to timely serve a qualified causation expert and was not entitled to more than the single thirty-day statutory extension.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Salais was entitled to an additional extension beyond the single 30-day cure period under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.351(c) | Salais argued she did not receive notice of the extension order until Aug 14, 2013, and after learning Winston was deceased she needed additional time to secure and serve a new expert report | TDADS argued only one 30-day extension is authorized; any report served after that period is untimely and mandates dismissal | Held: Only one 30-day extension is authorized; Salais was not entitled to further extension and her replacement report was untimely |
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing the health-care liability claim for failure to timely serve an expert report | Salais argued dismissal was improper because circumstances (late notice, expert death) justified additional time and Taylor’s report cured Winston’s deficiency | TDADS argued dismissal was required because the substitute report was filed well after the statutory extension and Taylor (a paramedic) was not qualified to opine on causation | Held: No abuse of discretion; dismissal affirmed because the report was untimely and Taylor was not a qualified causation expert |
Key Cases Cited
- Palacios v. Am. Transitional Care Ctrs. of Tex., 46 S.W.3d 873 (Tex. 2001) (standard: appellate review of dismissal for failure to serve expert report is abuse-of-discretion)
- Badiga v. Lopez, 274 S.W.3d 681 (Tex. 2009) (§ 74.351(c) authorizes a single 30-day extension to cure a deficient expert report)
- Stockton v. Offenbach, 336 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. 2011) (statutory extension interpretation reviewed de novo; limits on judicial discretion under § 74.351)
- Nexion Health at Beechnut, Inc. v. Paul, 335 S.W.3d 716 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (expert report filed after expiry of 30-day extension is deemed unserved and dismissal is mandatory)
- Doan v. Christus Health Ark-La-Tex, 329 S.W.3d 907 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2010, no pet.) (dismissal upheld despite extraordinary counsel-related circumstances; courts lack discretion to extend deadlines beyond statute)