Legal Opinion
Gill v. Russo
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Decided March 1, 2001No. 01-00-00070-CVPublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
COHEN, Justice.
Gill appeals the dismissal of his medical malpractice claims because of his failure to provide an expert report, as required by the Medical Liability and Insurance Improvement Act (the Act). See Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 4590i, § 13.01(d), (e) (Vernon Supp.2001). 1 We affirm.
Facts
Gill, a pro se inmate, had several cavities filled by appellee, Dr. Nicholas J. Russo, during his confinement. Gill contends Russo was negligent.
Analysis
In his third issue, Gill contends the provision requiring that an expert report be filed within 180 days of filing suit is unconstitutional…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Sax v. VottelerTexas Supreme Court · 1983
- Knie v. Piskun, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2000
- Humphreys v. RobersonTexas Supreme Court · 1935
- Ocomen v. Rubio, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2000
3Cited by33 opinions
- Mocega v. BRADFORD URQUHART, MD, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2002
- Perry v. Stanley, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2002
- Lookshin v. Feldman, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2003
- Richard Hebert and Janet Hebert v. Timothy E. Hopkins, M.D., and Shannon Clinic, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2013
- BROXTERMAN v. Carson, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2010
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.