in Re: Gladewater Healthcare Center, in Its Assumed or Common Name

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 25, 2009
• Docket: 06-08-00143-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-08-00143-CV ______________________________

IN RE: GLADEWATER HEALTHCARE CENTER, IN ITS ASSUMED OR COMMON NAME, ET AL.

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, corporate healthcare entities operating nursing homes in Upshur County, have filed

in this Court petitions for writs of mandamus relating to four long-pending healthcare liability

actions. In this cause, a companion case to In re Gladewater Healthcare Center, cause number 06-

08-00141-CV, Relators challenge the trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss trial court cause

number 605-03 styled Grabbs v. Gladewater Healthcare Center. The cause was originally filed in

August 2003, as were the other three pending cases.

We note that, in this cause, we have nothing in the record that would suggest the trial court

had set a date for trial. This fact could distinguish the instant case from the cause examined in our

cause number 06-08-00141-CV, the opinion issued this same day. We believe such a distinction

could be relevant under other circumstances to the application of the Texas Supreme Court's

discussion of reasons why review of these claims by mandamus would be unavailable:

For many of the same reasons, we acknowledge that mandamus review should not be granted in every pre-2003 case. The statute was intended to preclude extensive discovery and prolonged litigation in frivolous cases; review by mandamus may actually defeat those goals if discovery is complete, trial is imminent, or the existing expert reports show a case is not frivolous. But if the legislative purposes behind the statute are still attainable through mandamus review, Texas courts should not frustrate those purposes by a too-strict application of our own procedural devices.

In re McAllen Med. Ctr., Inc., No. 05-0892, 2008 Tex. LEXIS 759, at *19 (Tex. Aug. 29, 2008)

(orig. proceeding).

2 Here, however, considering the other factors mentioned in McAllen Medical Center (the

length the case has been pending, the detailed nature of the expert reports, and the time for

discovery), we believe that the outcome in the instant case remains the same. Further, the trial

court's denial of the motion to dismiss this case is not a clear abuse of discretion for the same reasons

as discussed in In re Gladewater Healthcare Center, cause number 06-08-00141-CV. That is, the

expert reports filed in this case are also sufficiently detailed such that the trial court was not required

to dismiss the cause of action. That said, the petition for writ of mandamus in this cause is, likewise,

denied.

Jack Carter Justice

Date Submitted: February 24, 2009 Date Decided: February 25, 2009