Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; October 8, 2014; Louisiana; State Appellate Court
In the medical malpractice case involving plaintiff Mirna Velasquez against Dr. Ralph R. Chesson, the trial court dismissed Velasquez's claims due to her failure to request service within the required ninety days after filing the petition, as stipulated by La. R.S. 13:5107. Although Velasquez filed a complaint with the State of Louisiana Division of Administration in April 2007 regarding alleged negligence during a tubal ligation procedure, she did not properly serve the defendant within the specified timeframe after filing her petition in April 2010. The trial court upheld the defendant's exception of insufficiency of service of process, leading to a dismissal without prejudice. Velasquez's subsequent motion for a new trial was denied, prompting her appeal.
On appeal, Velasquez contended that service on the State was not necessary since Dr. Chesson was not sued in his official capacity as a state healthcare provider. However, legal statutes dictate that service must be requested within ninety days when a state entity is involved, and failure to do so without demonstrating good cause results in dismissal. The court noted that 'good cause' does not include mere confusion regarding service details. The judgment's review standard is based on manifest error, emphasizing the importance of timely notice to defendants to ensure fairness in legal proceedings. Plaintiffs bear the responsibility of serving the proper agent for process and adhering to statutory timelines.
A lawsuit against a qualified state health care provider in Louisiana mandates service to specific entities, including the head of the department for the Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University Agricultural and Mechanical College, the Office of Risk Management, or the Attorney General of Louisiana. The plaintiff argued that service was unnecessary since Dr. Chesson was sued in his individual capacity. However, since the Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center is part of the Louisiana State University System and University Hospital is state-owned, Dr. Chesson is considered a state-employed physician, necessitating service to the appropriate entities.
The plaintiff was informed of Dr. Chesson's status as a qualified state health care provider through various notifications, including a letter from the Division of Administration and a certificate of qualification. The court found the plaintiff's attempt to evade service requirements non-viable, asserting that even if Dr. Chesson were sued individually, proper service was still required. The plaintiff attempted to serve Dr. Chesson at an address associated with the Louisiana State University Lions Center Clinic, but Dr. Chesson contested that he was never properly served.
As Dr. Chesson was a qualified state health care provider when the alleged malpractice occurred, statutes regarding service of process applied. The plaintiff failed to serve the proper parties within the required timeframe, leading to the suit's dismissal without prejudice. The court upheld the trial court's decision, noting that the plaintiff did not demonstrate good cause for the lack of service. Amendments to the relevant statutes enacted in 2014 were not relevant to the appeal. The judgment was affirmed, with a dissenting opinion noted.
