Stuart Gignilliat and Kasey Gignilliat v. American Economy Insurance Company, Fertility Institute of New Orleans, Ovation Fertility, and Texas Fertility Center

Summary

The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment dismissing claims by Stuart and Kasey Gignilliat and cross claims by Ovation against Fertility Institute of New Orleans. The court held that the pleadings were not narrowed to the loss of a single embryo in 2017 and that an ambiguous statement by plaintiffs’ counsel did not constitute a judicial confession limiting the claims. The court further concluded that genuine issues of material fact existed concerning the handling of embryos, FDA-related compliance failures, causation, disclosure, and the parties’ respective responsibilities.

Holdings

1. The plaintiffs' petition remained the operative pleading and asserted negligence claims concerning the handling and safeguarding of all of their embryos, not merely the single embryo associated with the March 2017 thaw.
2. The ambiguous oral statement by plaintiffs' counsel did not constitute a judicial confession that retroactively narrowed or abandoned claims stated in the petition.
3. Even if plaintiffs' counsel had made a valid judicial confession, it could not extinguish Ovation's independently asserted cross claims against FINO.
4. Summary judgment for FINO was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed concerning FINO's handling of the first six embryos, disclosure of regulatory options, the point at which the 2017 embryo was lost, causation, and comparative fault.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiffs' petition and written adoption of Ovation's opposition preserved negligence claims concerning all of their embryos, rather than limiting the case to the alleged loss of one embryo in March 2017.
2. Whether the oral statement by plaintiffs' counsel at the summary-judgment hearing constituted a judicial confession narrowing the plaintiffs' claims.
3. Whether a statement by plaintiffs' counsel could extinguish Ovation's separately pleaded cross claims against FINO.
4. Whether genuine issues of material fact concerning FINO's handling of the first six embryos, disclosure of regulatory options, the chain of custody, causation, and comparative fault precluded summary judgment.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded