Jane Doe, Individually and John Doe, Individually and as Natural Tutor for the Minor Child, J.D. v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc., Walt Disney Travel Co., Inc., Wicker, Smith, O'Hara, McCoy & Ford, P.A., Jones Walker, LLP, and Steven D. Felix

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Jane Doe, Individually and John Doe, Individually and as Natural Tutor for the Minor Child, J.D. v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc., Walt Disney Travel Co., Inc., Wicker, Smith, O'Hara, McCoy & Ford, P.A., Jones Walker, LLP, and Steven D. Felix

DecidedOctober 21, 2020

Docket2020CW0727

StatusUnknown

This text of Jane Doe, Individually and John Doe, Individually and as Natural Tutor for the Minor Child, J.D. v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc., Walt Disney Travel Co., Inc., Wicker, Smith, O'Hara, McCoy & Ford, P.A., Jones Walker, LLP, and Steven D. Felix (Jane Doe, Individually and John Doe, Individually and as Natural Tutor for the Minor Child, J.D. v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc., Walt Disney Travel Co., Inc., Wicker, Smith, O'Hara, McCoy & Ford, P.A., Jones Walker, LLP, and Steven D. Felix) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jane Doe, Individually and John Doe, Individually and as Natural Tutor for the Minor Child, J.D. v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc., Walt Disney Travel Co., Inc., Wicker, Smith, O'Hara, McCoy & Ford, P.A., Jones Walker, LLP, and Steven D. Felix, (La. Ct. App. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

INDIVIDUALLY AND NO. 2020 CW 0727 JANE DOE, JOHN DOE, INDIVIDUALLY AND

AS NATURAL TUTOR FOR THE MINOR CHILD J. D.

VERSUS

WALT DISNEY PARKS AND RESORT, US, INC., WALT

DISNEY TRAVEL CO., INC.,

SMITH, O' HARA, MCCOY WICKER, OCTOBER 21, 2020 FORD, P. A., JONES WALKER,

LLP, AND STEVEN D. FELIX

Steven D. Felix, M. D., applying for supervisory writs, In Re: Court, Parish of East Baton 19th Judicial District

Rouge, No. 688984.

HOLDRIDGE, LANIER, AND WOLFE, JJ. BEFORE: HIGGINBOTHAM, THERIOT,

de novo review, we find the action WRIT GRANTED. After a

Nineteenth Judicial District brought against Dr. Felix in the submitted to court is premature as it was filed prior to being medical review panel. La. R. S. and determined by a

to the allegations found in the 40: 1231. 8 ( B) ( 1) ( a) ( i) . Looking against Dr. Felix are claims petition, we find the allegations

for lack of consent and dereliction of professional skill during allegations that fall within the Medical treatment, which are

96- 1575 ( La. 10/ 10/ 97), Malpractice Act. Lugenbuhl v. Dowling, See also Wilson v. Landry ex rel., 98- 2365 701 So. 2d 447, 453. 748 So. 2d 655, writ denied sub La. ist Cir. 12/ 28/ 99), App. T. W. 2000- 0260 ( La. 3/ 24/ 00), nom., Wilson ex rel. v. Landry, 40: 1157. 1. Therefore, this writ is 758 So. 2d 155; La. R. S. judgment Dr. Felix' s granted, the July 27, 2020 denying the exception of exception of prematurity is reversed,

Felix, M. D. is sustained, and the prematurity filed by Steven D. filed the Does are dismissed without claims against him by prejudice.

TMH MRT

GH WIL

Wolfe, J., dissents and would deny the writ.

D UTY C R F COURT

FOR THE COURT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI