Columbia North Hills Hospital Subsidiary, L.P. v. Alvarez, 382 S.W.3d 619

Columbia North Hills Hospital Subsidiary, L.P. d/b/a North Hills Hospital appeals an order denying its motion to dismiss under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.351.
The hospital challenges five issues related to extension to cure, expert qualifications, sufficiency of the expert report, and dismissal with prejudice; the court affirms.
Sandra Alvarez died after hysterectomy and subsequent surgical repairs for hemorrhagic shock at North Hills; her death prompted vicarious and direct liability theories against the hospital.
Appellees served an expert report from Dr. Tyuluman; North Hills sought dismissal arguing improper qualifications and deficiencies in the report.
On remand, the trial court granted a thirty-day extension to cure deficiencies and allowed a new report from Brosseau; North Hills challenged the admissibility of Brosseau’s report.
The court held the amended reports, taken together, satisfied the statutory requirements for the direct-liability and causation elements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Thirty-day extension validity	North Hills argues remand extension was improper and Brosseau’s report should be ignored.	North Hills contends the extension contravenes § 74.351(c) and targets a new report.	Extension permissible; Brosseau’s report addressed deficiencies.
Brosseau’s qualifications	Brosseau is qualified to opine on hospital administration, training, and policies for direct-liability claims.	Brosseau lacks nursing/medical credentials to opine on standard of care.	Brosseau qualified as an expert under § 74.402 for direct-liability claims.
Brosseau’s expert report sufficiency	Brosseau’s report adequately states the standard of care and breach and links to facts.	Report is too conclusory and does not sufficiently state standard, breach, and causation.	Report adequately states the standard of care, breach, and links to facts to meet § 74.351(r)(6).
Causation linkage	Tyuluman’s causation theory ties the breaches identified by Brosseau to Alvarez’s death.	Brosseau’s causation analysis is insufficient or not required from him.	Tyuluman’s causation linking satisfies the statutory requirement and ties to Brosseau’s breaches.
Sanctions for frivolous appeal	North Hills should be sanctioned for delaying proceedings without merit.	No frivolous appeal; sanctions not warranted.	No sanctions awarded; cross point overruled.

Bowie Mem’l Hosp. v. Wright, 79 S.W.3d 48 (Tex. 2002) (standard for expert reports and causation considerations)
Reed v. Granbury Hosp. Corp., 117 S.W.3d 404 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2003) (hospital policies/procedures knowledge required for direct claims)
Denton Reg’l Med. Ctr. v. LaCroix, 947 S.W.2d 941 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1997) (standard for direct hospital liability and expert qualifications)
Palacios v. American Transitional Care Ctrs. of Tex., Inc., 46 S.W.3d 873 (Tex. 2001) (definition of fair summary and nexus between standard of care, breach, and causation)
Hollingsworth v. Springs, 353 S.W.3d 506 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2011) (qualification sufficiency for hospital-administration experts)
Barber v. Mercer, 303 S.W.3d 786 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2009) (how to assess expert qualification from report and CV)
Lewis v. Funderburk, 253 S.W.3d 204 (Tex. 2008) (application of § 74.351 and report supplementation)
Salais v. Tex. Dep’t of Aging & Disability Servs., 323 S.W.3d 527 (Tex.App.-Waco 2010) (linkage requirement between standard-of-care breach and causation)
Jernigan v. Langley, 195 S.W.3d 91 (Tex.2006) (standard for reviewing denial of motion to dismiss)
Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238 (Tex.1985) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)
Ehrlich v. Miles, 144 S.W.3d 620 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2004) (limitations on appellate deference to trial-law interpretations)