Pamela Suzette Cloud Byrd v. Charles D. Knight, Jr., M.D., et al.

Byrd · Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit · December 10, 2025 · No. 56,577-CA

Summary

The Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment dismissing a medical malpractice lawsuit arising from Rainniel Cloud’s death following laparoscopic gallbladder surgery. The court reviewed claims that Dr. Charles D. Knight breached the standard of care by operating while Cloud’s antiplatelet medications remained effective and by failing to timely recognize and treat postoperative bleeding. A jury had found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the applicable standard of care.

Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit
Writing for the Court
Robinson, J.; Stephens, J.; Ellender, J.
Jurisdiction
Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit
Decision date
December 10, 2025
Docket number
56,577-CA
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs appealed a judgment dismissing their medical malpractice claims against Dr. Charles Knight and Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company after a jury found that plaintiffs failed to prove the applicable standard of care for Dr. Knight as a general surgeon.
Standard of review
The appellate court reviewed the jury's factual findings under the manifest-error standard. Reversal required a finding that no reasonable factual basis existed for the finding and that the record established the finding was clearly wrong. The trial court's evidentiary rulings were reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Pamela Suzette Cloud Byrd, Pamela Suzette Cloud, Robert Clayton Christian Byrd, Debbie Ruth Cloud Blake, Patricia JoAnne Cloud McKenna, Estate of Rainniel Cloud v. Charles D. Knight, Jr., M.D., Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company, Thomas Trawick, Jr., M.D., Charles D. Knight, M.D., et al.
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

medical malpracticestandard of careinformed consentstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

medical malpracticehealth lawtortsappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the jury committed manifest error in finding that plaintiffs failed to prove the applicable standard of care for Dr. Knight's medical and surgical management of Cloud.
  2. Whether the trial court committed legal error or abused its discretion by preventing plaintiffs from presenting an independent lack-of-informed-consent claim or using informed-consent evidence to expand the pleadings.

Holdings

  1. The jury's finding was not manifestly erroneous because the record provided a reasonable factual basis for concluding that plaintiffs failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence the standard of care applicable to Dr. Knight as a general surgeon in 2011.
  2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that an independent informed-consent cause of action was outside the pleadings and by limiting the use of informed-consent evidence to matters relevant to Dr. Knight's state of mind and the medical records.

Key quotations

The appellate court must not reweigh the evidence or substitute its own factual findings because it would have decided the case differently. (29)
It was within the province of the jury to reject Swirsky’s opinions as to the standards of care. (32)
The trial court painstakingly set forth the limits placed on plaintiff’s counsel when examining witnesses about matters that possibly involved informed consent. (34)

Factual background

Rainniel Cloud, who had significant cardiac, pulmonary, vascular, and other comorbidities and was taking aspirin and Plavix, underwent an urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. After surgery he developed hypotension, anemia, and an abdominal collection of nearly a liter of clotted blood, requiring exploratory laparotomy and transfusion. Cloud died the next morning after developing shock, acidosis, renal failure, and multiorgan dysfunction. Plaintiffs contended that Dr. Knight negligently failed to account for the antiplatelet medications, monitor Cloud adequately, diagnose postoperative bleeding promptly, and use platelet therapy; the defense attributed the death primarily to sepsis from the infected and necrotic gallbladder.

Procedural history

Plaintiffs initiated medical review panel proceedings in 2012 and later filed suit in 2013. Claims against Highland Hospital and Dr. Trawick were dismissed, and the claim against Dr. Blum was partially dismissed. After a four-day jury trial in May 2024, the jury found that plaintiffs had not proved the applicable standard of care, and the trial court rendered judgment dismissing all claims against Dr. Knight and LAMMICO with prejudice. The court of appeal affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…