East Texas Medical Center D/B/A East Texas Medical Center Emergency Medical Services v. Jody Delaune Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Crystal Delaune, and as Next Friend of D. D., D. D. and D. A. D., Minors
12-15-00014-CV
| Tex. App. | Jul 23, 2015Background
- Appellant East Texas Medical Center EMS appeals a take-nothing judgment after Appellees alleged ETMC failed to train two EMS personnel on restraint use for Crystal Delaune.
- Appellees’ claims against ETMC are asserted as negligent training—relying on alleged injury from restraint handling.
- Trial court dismissed negligence claims against Moore and Spurgers (caring for Delaune) finding no actionable tort by them, making ETMC’s training negligent claim dependent.
- Appellees’ theory requires showing an actionable tort by Moore or Spurgers to support negligent training; evidence showed ETMC’s restraint training complied with policy and national curriculum.
- ETMC argues there was legally insufficient evidence of the applicable standard of care and breach, and that Appellees failed to prove proximate cause.
- Evidence at trial showed Moore/Spurgers were pre-certified paramedics with ETMC training; ETMC had restraint policies and adhered to national standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a independent actionable tort by the employees is required | Delaune argues the training claim is actionable via negligent training | ETMC contends the claim is dependent on an actionable tort by Moore/Spurgers | Yes; actionable tort by employees is required (dependent tort doctrine) |
| Whether there is legally sufficient evidence of the applicable standard of care and breach | Appellees claim ETMC breached standard of care in training | ETMC asserts evidence shows proper training and compliance | No; evidence is legally insufficient to prove applicable standard and breach |
| Whether Lacroix or related authorities govern independent failure-to-train claims here | Appellees rely on Lacroix to avoid requiring actionable tort | Lacroix is inapplicable because this is a training claim, not a different tort | Lacroix not controlling; essential element remains actionable tort by employee |
| Whether trial evidence supports proximate cause linking training to Appellees’ injuries | Training deficiency caused injuries through Moore/Spurgers | No causal link shown; Moore/Spurgers did not commit actionable tort | No proximate cause established; take-nothing judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Mackey v. U.P. Enterprises, Inc., 935 S.W.2d 446 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1996) (to recover on negligent training, plaintiff must show training beyond what employer provided)
- Patino v. Complete Tire, Inc., 158 S.W.3d 655 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005) (no-evidence standard; employer liability requires evidence of training and standard of care)
- Allsup's Convenience Stores, Inc. v. Warren, 934 S.W.2d 433 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1996) (lack of evidence of negligence or duty; training context)