Steven Hoyt, Individually, and as Next of Friend of Minor Children, T.H. and J.H., and as Sole Administrator of the Estate of Kristine Hoyt v. David D. Kim, M.D. and Juan Luis Zamora, M.D.
05-16-00404-CV
| Tex. App. | Apr 28, 2017Background
- Kristine "Kris" Hoyt died on the operating table after an exploratory laparoscopic procedure; Dr. David Kim performed the surgery and a trocar-related aortic injury was alleged.
- Dr. Kim initially told Kris's husband (Steven) the death resulted from a trocar injury; hospital-ordered autopsy by Dr. Juan Zamora concluded death from spontaneous aortic dissection and degenerative disease.
- Dr. Kim revised his operative report after receiving Zamora’s preliminary autopsy report; appellants later obtained a second autopsy by Dr. Michael Baden, who concluded the death was caused by inadvertent aortic perforation during surgery.
- Plaintiffs (Steven individually, as next friend of minor children, and as administrator of Kris’s estate) sued multiple defendants alleging negligence and post-mortem fraud/cover-up; on appeal only fraud and conspiracy-to-commit-fraud claims against Kim and Zamora were at issue.
- The trial court granted no-evidence summary judgment for Kim and Zamora; plaintiffs’ motion for new trial (trying to add evidence) was denied; appellate court reviews whether plaintiffs produced more than a scintilla of evidence on challenged elements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Kim committed fraud by misrepresentations (cause of death; need for autopsy; J.P. inquiry) | Kim altered his report to match Zamora and misled Steven about autopsy availability and necessity, inducing reliance | Kim said cause was trocar injury; any report edits were internal/not representations to plaintiffs; plaintiffs did not justifiably rely and produced no damages | Judgment for Kim: plaintiffs judicially admitted cause; only J.P. contact issue raised fact dispute but no justifiable reliance or damages proven; fraud claim fails |
| Whether Zamora committed fraud by misrepresenting cause of death in autopsy report | Zamora’s autopsy report falsely attributed death to dissection/degeneration, supporting fraud claim | Plaintiffs did not rely on Zamora’s report; they commissioned and relied on Baden’s second autopsy | Judgment for Zamora: no evidence of justifiable reliance on Zamora’s report, so fraud claim fails |
| Whether there was a civil conspiracy to commit fraud between Kim and Zamora | Changes to Kim’s report and Zamora’s autopsy reflect coordinated cover-up and meeting of minds to defraud plaintiffs | Conspiracy requires an underlying tort (fraud) and damages; plaintiffs have no viable fraud or damages evidence | Judgment for defendants: conspiracy is derivative of fraud and fails without underlying tort or damages |
| Whether appellants produced more than scintilla of evidence to defeat no-evidence summary judgments | Evidence of conflicting testimony (J.P. contact), report alterations, and timing created fact issues | No evidence on crucial elements (false representation re: cause, justifiable reliance, damages); some documentary evidence was not properly presented below | Judgment: no-evidence summary judgment affirmed; plaintiffs failed to raise fact issues on every challenged element |
Key Cases Cited
- King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman, 118 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. 2003) (standard for reviewing no-evidence summary judgment)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 92 S.W.3d 502 (Tex. 2002) (no-evidence standard: more than a scintilla required)
- Aquaplex, Inc. v. Rancho La Valencia, 297 S.W.3d 768 (Tex. 2009) (elements of fraud require falsity of representation)
- Grant Thornton LLP v. Prospect High Income Fund, 314 S.W.3d 913 (Tex. 2010) (justifiable reliance timing in fraud claims)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (reviewing evidence in light most favorable to nonmovant)
- Massey v. Armco Steel Co., 652 S.W.2d 932 (Tex. 1983) (elements required for civil conspiracy)