Richard Hebert and Janet Hebert v. Timothy E. Hopkins, M.D., and Shannon Clinic, 395 S.W.3d 884

Hebert’s sued Dr. Hopkins and Shannon Clinic for spinal surgery negligence in Sep. 2008.
Within 120 days, Heberts served an expert report by Dr. White and CV; defendants objected to sufficiency.
District court sustained objections but granted 30-day extension to cure; Heberts served a supplemental report.
Court ultimately dismissed with prejudice after the reports were deemed deficient and awarded attorney’s fees as provided by chapter 74.
Heberts argued constitutional challenges to chapter 74; district court rejected those challenges; Heberts appealed.
Richard Hebert died during the appeal, but the case proceeded on appeal as if alive per procedural rule.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of expert reports under Chapter 74	Heberts: White's reports were a good-faith effort	Hopkins/Shannon: reports were conclusory and deficient	District court did not abuse discretion; reports insufficient
Constitutional challenges to Chapter 74	Heberts: 120-day limit, four-corners rule, and fee dismissal violate rights	Heberts: statute rationally related to state interests; no constitutional defect	Constitutional challenges rejected; statute upheld

Palacios v. American Transitional Care Centers of Texas, Inc., 46 S.W.3d 873 (Tex. 2001) (establishes good-faith and three-element standard for expert reports; four-ccorner rule)
Bowie Mem’l Hosp. v. Wright, 79 S.W.3d 48 (Tex. 2002) (integrates three-element standard and good-faith requirements)
Jelinek v. Casas, 328 S.W.3d 526 (Tex. 2010) (clarifies inform defendant and show merit sufficiency for expert report)
Smalling v. Gardner, 203 S.W.3d 354 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005) (rational basis for expert-report requirement; health-care claim focus)
Hightower v. Baylor Univ. Med. Ctr., 348 S.W.3d 512 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2011) (rejection of separation-of-powers and due-process challenges to Chapter 74)