Nexus Recovery Center, Inc. v. Mathis
336 S.W.3d 360
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Nexus Recovery Center is a residential/outpatient treatment center for women with alcohol and drug problems; Mathis enrolled in 2005.
- Mathis was pregnant, suicidal, and involved with counselor Oletha Morrow; Morrow displayed flirtatious behavior she perceived as amorous.
- After Mathis left Nexus, Morrow allegedly engaged in sexual contact/exploitation/therapeutic deception with Mathis months later, at locations outside Nexus.
- Mathis sued Nexus in 2008 for negligence, negligent hiring/supervision/training, and breach of fiduciary duty; later amended to assert Chapter 81 sexual exploitation claims.
- Nexus moved to dismiss under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.351, arguing Mathis's claims are health care liability claims; trial court denied.
- The Texas Court of Appeals held Mathis's Chapter 81 claims are not health care liability claims under Chapter 74 and affirmed dismissal denial.
- Court applied a de novo standard to determine whether the claims fall under health care liability and whether the alleged conduct is inseparable from health care.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are Mathis's claims health care liability claims under Chapter 74? | Mathis's claims arise from Morrow's sexual exploitation related to care and safety standards. | The essence of the claims is Nexus's negligence in hiring/supervision, inseparable from health care duties. | Not health care liability claims; not subject to § 74.351. |
| Do Morrow's post-treatment actions tie to health care services of Nexus? | Post-treatment sexual actions are connected to the care relationship and safety obligations. | Post-treatment acts occurred after treatment and away from Nexus, not inseparable from care. | Not inseparable from health care; not health care liability. |
| Do Nexus's alleged failures to inquire/report fall within health care liability? | Failure to inquire/report reflects nexus's duties related to care and patient safety. | Administrative actions unrelated to direct health care; not health care duties. | Not health care liability; § 74.351 not applicable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Marks v. St. Luke's Episcopal Hosp., 319 S.W.3d 658 (Tex.2010) (three-element framework for health care liability claims)
- Diversicare Gen. Partner, Inc. v. Rubio, 185 S.W.3d 842 (Tex.2005) (inseparable/ integral relation between injury and care governs liability)
- Garland Cty. Hosp. v. Rose, 156 S.W.3d 541 (Tex.2004) (definition and scope of health care liability claims)
- NCED Mental Health, Inc. v. Kidd, 214 S.W.3d 28 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2006) (on point for whether certain alleged exploitation/safety issues fall under health care liability)
- Yamada v. Friend, 335 S.W.3d 192 (Tex.2010) (addressing scope and pleading related to health care claims)
- Diversicare Gen. Partner, Inc. v. Rubio, 185 S.W.3d 842 (Tex.2005) (stakeholders' standards of safety related to care evaluated for health care claims)