Chesser v. LIFECARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES
356 S.W.3d 613
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Chesser sued LifeCare Hospital and LMS for health care negligence after PEG-tube complications during care at Hospital led to serious injury; the Hospital is operated by LMS, which also oversees other facilities.
- Chesser alleged three settling doctors were negligent, and the jury found Hospital negligent and LMS/Hospital engaged in a joint enterprise; several damages were awarded beyond caps.
- Settlement credit was initially calculated as a 10% percentage of responsibility, reducing damages by $377,383.53, while costs were reduced by $48,334.
- Key expert testimony on settling doctors was deemed conclusory and insufficient to prove duty, breach, or causation by those doctors.
- The court ultimately held the percentage-of-responsibility settlement credit improper and replaced it with a dollar-for-dollar settlement credit of $183,000, and partially invalidated the joint-enterprise finding.
- The judgment was modified to impose severally liable amounts for noneconomic damages, with Hospital and LMS each limited to $250,000 noneconomic damages, and future damages funded by an annuity under § 74.505.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Settlement doctors' negligence and percentages | Chesser: settling doctors' negligence lacked evidence; percentage not supportable. | Appellees: evidence supported submission of settling doctors' responsibility and their percentages. | No evidence supports settling doctors' negligence; reverse and apply dollar-for-dollar credit. |
| Joint enterprise between LMS and Hospital | Chesser: joint enterprise existed, making both liable for injuries. | Appellees: no community of pecuniary interest; no equal voice/control established. | Legal insufficiency of community-of-pecuniary-interest element; modify to severally liable by party per percentage. |
| LMS negligence proximate cause | LMS breached duties by lacking post-PEG policies, care plans, and supervision, causally linked to injuries. | Hospital/ LMS: evidence insufficient or non-medical causation, and care plans not mandatory. | Evidence legally and factually sufficient to support LMS proximate cause; affirm liability against LMS for its negligence. |
| Judgment errors: noneconomic damages caps and periodic payments | Caps limit noneconomic damages; adjust judgment accordingly; periodic payments may be required. | Caps apply; prejudgment interest handling; periodic payments authorized under §74.505. | 74.301(a) and (b) caps apply separately to LMS and Hospital; Hospital not liable for LMS’s capped amount; prejudgment interest not included in noneconomic cap; periodic payment provisions upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standard for legal sufficiency and evidence review)
- St. Joseph Hosp. v. Wolff, 94 S.W.3d 513 (Tex. 2003) (abuse of discretion in jury instructions; joint enterprise analysis)
- Able v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. 2000) (joint enterprise elements; pecuniary interest sharing)
- Shoemaker v. Estate of Clyde Whistler, 513 S.W.2d 10 (Tex. 1974) (joint enterprise concepts; control and common purpose)
- Park Place Hosp. v. Estate of Milo, 909 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. 1995) (causation standard and expert testimony in medical malpractice)
- Havner v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 953 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1997) (conclusory expert testimony not evidence of causation)
- Coastal Transp. Co. v. Crown Cent. Petroleum Corp., 136 S.W.3d 227 (Tex. 2004) (conclusion that conclusory testimony is no evidence)
- Duff v. Yelin, 751 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. 1988) (causation and expert testimony in medical cases)
- Jelinek v. Casas, 328 S.W.3d 526 (Tex. 2010) (proximate cause requires medical probability evidence)