Lawsuit of the Day

Yunieth Romero, an 18 year old Jehovah's Witness who "had never even kissed a man," suffered from Tourette's Syndrome. She was dizzy from the medication she had been prescribed. She went to Christus St. Catherine Hospital in Katy, Texas, to get evaluated. She was admitted for 3 days. On the second day, she was assigned a male nurse to assist her. This male nurse, named "Sok," undressed Yunieth and, during that process, "looked at her body in such a way that it made her very uncomfortable." After the shower, Sok tried to help Yunieth put her underwear back on but she refused to let him help. Later, when Sok came back to her room, he said he needed to adjust her EKG. During this, he felt Yunieth's left breast and digitally penetrated her vagina. 


Needless to say, an assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuit were filed. Yunieth is seeking various damages, including for punitive damages.


Cause No. 2012-30588; Yunieth Romero v. Christus Health; In the 295th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas

Only in Texas

This is something you regularly see on the highways of Texas.


I am not kidding.

Lawsuit of the Day

Wayne Hegefeld and Matthew Martinez were co-owners of a successful flooring company in Houston. Out of the blue, Wayne starts becoming suspicious and paranoid, accusing employees of theft and verbally attacking other workers at the company. It came to a head in October 2011, when he went on a "inner office tirade" screaming and yelling at Matthew. It got so bad, according to Matthew's lawsuit, that Wayne threw a hat rack at Matthew. Wayne also threatened Matthew with a golf club. 


It only took a month after that tantrum (!) for the two to decide to go their separate ways. Not surprisingly, Wayne is refusing to cooperate in that and is making accusations of theft, is stealing property, slandering Matthew, and refusing to write checks for the company's continued operations. He even went so far as to hire a forensic accountant to confirm that Matthew was stealing from the company; unfortunately for Wayne, the results didn't come out the way he wanted.


Cause No. 2012-29791; Martinez v. Hegefeld; In the 125th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas

"Got My Ninjas"

It's a little dangerous to be a family court judge down in Houston. 

Lawsuit of the Day

Luong Nguyen had the misfortune of parking his vehicle at a townhome complex in west Houston. Apparently, the property managers of that complex, or more likely the towing company they hired to police the parking lot, thought he parked there illegally. When Nguyen ran out to see that his car was being towed, he tried to stop the wrecker driver. Unfortunately for Nguyen, the wrecker driver was trained in mixed martial arts, as he "grabbed him in a headlock, punched him and threw him to the ground." Not surprisingly, the car was towed and Nguyen had to spend nearly $6,000 to recover from his injuries.

In Nguyen's lawsuit filed in Harris County yesterday, he claimed that the wrecker driver committed an intentional tort (assault) against him (well, duh!) and that his employer was negligent in hiring, retaining, and supervising him. He even sued the townhome complex for failing to supervise the towing company.

Cause No. 2012-29493, Nguyen v. Martin, et al., In the 281st Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS REFUSES TO DISMISS MED-MAL CASE FOR UNQUALIFIED EXPERT
Hillery v. Kyle, First Court of Appeals (Houston), May 17, 2012 [No. 01-11-00708-CV]
Melinda Kyle was admitted to a hospital with gangrene in her right toe. She was treated by her attending doctor, a cardiologist, a vascular surgeon, and then finally Dr. Hillery, a general surgeon. Hillery amputated Kyle's right leg. After the surgery, Hillery failed to order a Heparin drip to continue, which had been used to prevent clotting. About 2 weeks later, she had a stroke and was declared brain dead. She died six days later. Melinda's heirs brought a health care liability claim against Hillery and others. As required, they filed an expert report prepared by Dr. Goldman, a cardiologist. Hillery moved to dismiss the lawsuit, since a cardiologist was not qualified to offer opinions on the standard of care applicable to a general surgeon. Hillery also objected that Dr. Goldman’s opinion was conclusory because it failed to link the facts of the case to his conclusion that Hillery’s breach of the standard of care caused Melinda’s death. The Fort Bend County judge denied Hillery's motion to dismiss
On appeal, the First Court of Appeals looked at whether Goldman was qualified. The statute requires that the expert be a physician who actually practices medicine, has "knowledge of accepted standards of medical care for the diagnosis, care, or treatment of the illness, injury, or condition involved in the claim", and is qualified through training or experience to offer an expert opinion regarding those accepted standards of medical care. Not surprisingly, Hillery claimed that Goldman was not qualified to offer opinions in the areas of general surgery or amputation. However, the case law and statute do not require that the expert practice in the same field as a defendant in a health care liability claim. The expert only has to have knowledge of the condition involved in the claim. 
Hillery also claims that he was “consulted solely regarding amputation” and was not asked to provide any other care. But Hillery's performance on the amputation surgery wasn't the basis of the suit. Instead, the basis of the claim and the focus of Goldman’s report was the failure to properly anti-coagulate Melinda following the surgery. Hillery didn't clam that Goldman, who is board-certified in cardiovascular diseases and internal medicine, was not qualified to offer an opinion on the standard of care relating to the need to administer anti-coagulation medication following surgery.

A Start

Sunday is a great day to start a legal blog. When you should be relaxing, you're thinking about case law and civil trial issues. But, when you have a busy practice at a small civil defense firm, it makes sense to start posting your thoughts on civil lawsuits, recent decisions by the courts, and other interesting things.

It'll be difficult to transition from the dry legal writing to blog writing but it's worth a try.