 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Perritt v. Dona9/20/2002
PEATROSS, J., concurs with written reasons.
BROWN, C.J., concurs/dissents in part with reasons.
WILLIAMS, J., concurs and dissents in part for the reasons assigned by C.J. Brown.
These three cases concern the sufficiency of the statement of plaintiff's claim before the medical review panel in a malpractice action. They have been consolidated for our review by remand from the Louisiana Supreme Court. Arnold v. Dona, 01-3073 (La. 3/15/02), 812 So.2d 623; Perritt v. Dona, 01-3175 (La. 3/15/02), 812 So.2d 624; and Richmond v. Brown, 2002-0241 (La. 3/15/02), 812 So.2d 624. Two of the three cases involve the defendants' use of written interrogatories for discovery which this court, in its initial supervisory rulings, found improper. We reaffirm those rulings and our initial supervisory ruling in the third case for the following reasons.
Facts and Procedural History
The three separate actions in this consolidated appeal were all instituted as proceedings in the district court incidental to pending medical review panel inquiries under the Medical Malpractice Act ("MMA"). La. R.S. 40:1299.41, et seq. The procedural contexts of the actions as instituted by the defendant/health care providers were not uniform; the rulings by the separate district judges conflicted; and separate panels of this court initially reviewed those rulings upon the parties' applications for supervisory review. Nevertheless, the issue which was common in all actions concerns the sufficiency of the statement of the material facts of plaintiff's demand which is necessary for the presentation of a claim to the medical review panel.
In Harold Ross Perritt, et ux v. Grant Dona, M.D. (hereinafter Perritt), the health care provider filed a pleading entitled "Motion to Compel" to require the plaintiffs to provide a more detailed description of the alleged malpractice by amendment of plaintiff's letter to the Patients' Compensation Fund ("PCF") and the Commissioner of Administration. Such a letter commences the procedure for the formation of the medical review panel. La. R.S. 40:1299.47(A); Holmes v. Lee, 35,021 (La. App. 2d Cir. 9/28/01), 795 So.2d 1232. The PCF letter was filed in the record and its caption and description of plaintiffs' claim provide, in pertinent part, as follows:
RE: * * *
Defendant:
Grant Dona, M.D.
Dates of Treatment: February 29, 2000 through March 15, 2000
Dates of Malpractice: Beginning February 29, 2000
Rowland A. Torres, M.D.
Dates of Treatment: March 15, 2000 - May 4, 2000
Dates of Malpractice: Beginning March 15, 2000
St. Francis Medical Center
Dates of Treatment: Beginning March 13, 2000
Dates of Malpractice: Beginning March 13, 2000
Healthsouth Rehabilitation Hospital
Dates of Treatment: March 29, 2000 - May 5, 2000
Dates of Malpractice: Beginning March 29, 2000
Dear Mr. Drennen and Mrs. Jackson:
This letter shall confirm that we have been retained by the above referenced claimants with regard to a medical negligence claim against the defendants listed above arising out of the care and treatment provided to Harold Ross Perritt beginning on the dates indicated hereinabove. Based upon the medical information provided to date, claimants allege that the defendants deviated from the applicable standard of appropriate medical care regarding the care and treatment which they provided to Harold Ross Perritt.
Following a contradictory hearing, the trial court in Perritt ruled that the PCF letter "does not conta
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|