Caviglia v. Tate Ex Rel. Mendez, 363 S.W.3d 298

Mendez, born 2/29/2000 at ~24 weeks gestation, weighed ~650 g, high risk for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).
Ophthalmologist Llamas-Soforo examined May 1 and found no ROP; subsequent May 22 exam found advanced ROP.
Laser surgery on May 25, 2000 failed to prevent bilateral legal blindness.
Plaintiff, as next friend of Mendez, filed suit in 2009 against ophthalmologist, NICU neonatologists, hospital, and others.
Plaintiff served two expert reports: Dr. Good (pediatric ophthalmology) and Dr. Sims (neonatology); defendants objected to adequacy; trial court overruled objections; interlocutory appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Adequacy of Dr. Good's report on causation	Good's causation discussion is an objective good faith effort.	Good's causation analysis is conclusory and insufficient to link breaches to injury.	Trial court did not abuse discretion; Good's report adequate.
Adequacy of Dr. Sims' report on causation	Sims qualified to discuss neonatal care and causation.	Sims lacks expertise in ophthalmology and causal link is not established.	Trial court abused discretion; Sims' report inadequate.
Sanctions/frivolousness of appeal	Appellants' briefing was thorough; some abuse occurred.	Appeal not frivolous; reasonable expectation of reversal.	No damages awarded for frivolous appeal.

American Transitional Care Ctrs. of Tex., Inc. v. Palacios, 46 S.W.3d 873 (Tex. 2001) (standard for abuse of discretion; review of 74.351 ruling)
In re McAllen Med. Ctr., 275 S.W.3d 458 (Tex. 2008) (qualification required for expert; Rule 702)
Broders v. Heise, 924 S.W.2d 148 (Tex. 1996) (expert qualifications vs. subject matter)
Palacios, 46 S.W.3d 873 (Tex. 2001) (objective good faith effort; inform court and show merit)
Palafox v. Silvey, 247 S.W.3d 310 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2007) (causal relationship standard; substantial factor and but-for test)
Roberts v. Williamson, 111 S.W.3d 113 (Tex. 2003) (expert qualification to testify; cross-disciplinary)