Summary
The Supreme Court of Texas held that a claim arising from allegedly improper laser hair removal was a health care liability claim under the Texas Medical Liability Act. Because the claimant failed to serve the required expert report, the Court reversed the court of appeals’ judgment and remanded for the trial court to consider dismissal and the healthcare provider’s request for attorney’s fees and costs.
Holdings
- A claim alleging improper laser hair removal is a health care liability claim when it is asserted against a health care provider and concerns treatment involving a regulated surgical laser for which expert health care testimony is necessary to prove or refute a departure from accepted standards of health care.
- The absence of a direct physician-patient interaction does not prevent the existence of a physician-patient relationship for purposes of determining whether a claim is a health care liability claim, and the clinic's status as a professional association independently satisfied the statutory physician requirement.
- Because Guerrero's claim was a health care liability claim and she failed to serve the required expert report within the statutory period, dismissal was required.
Questions Presented
- Whether Guerrero's claim for injuries allegedly caused by improper laser hair removal was a health care liability claim under the Texas Medical Liability Act.
- Whether the presumption that the claim was a health care liability claim was rebutted because the procedure allegedly was performed by a nurse rather than a physician.
- Whether Guerrero's failure to serve an expert report required dismissal of the claim.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (3)
- Bioderm Skin Care, LLC v. Sok, __ S.W.3d __, __ (Tex. 2014)(followed)
- Tex. W. Oaks Hosp., LP v. Williams, 371 S.W.3d 171, 179-80, 182-83 (Tex. 2012)(followed)
- Loaisiga v. Cerda, 379 S.W.3d 248, 252 (Tex. 2012)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…