Home -> Law Blog Directory -> New Law Blogs Blogs -> Supreme Court of Texas Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
New Law Blogs
: Supreme Court of Texas BlogWhen does a trial court?s discovery schedule extend the 120-day statutory deadline for medical expert reports?
By Don Cruse
Spectrum Healthcare Resources, Inc. and Michael Sims v. Janice McDaniel and Patrick McDaniel, No. 07-0787 (Tex. Mar. 12, 2010) (docket and briefs)
With today’s case, the answer is that “an agreed docket control order must explicitly reference section 74.351 threshold expert reports if the order is to constitute an agreement to extend that deadline.”
We hold that an agreement of the parties that is intended to extend the statutorily mandated 120-day expert report deadline must explicitly state that the agreement is for that purpose. An agreed docket control order that includes only a general discovery deadline for the production of expert reports is ineffective to extend the statute’s specific threshold expert report requirement.
Justice Green delivered the opinion of the Court. He was joined by Justice Hecht, Justice Wainwright, Justice Johnson, Justice Willett, and Justice Guzman.
The Chief Justice wrote a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justice O’Neill and Justice Medina.
The dissent would have concluded that the order in this case was specific enough. This order made general reference to Chapter 74 and said that, “to the extent these deadlines may be in conflict with deadlines set by rule or statute, the deadlines established by this Docket Control Order shall take precedence.” Under the majority’s test, this was inadequate.
The dissent concluded that, however much sense a bright-line rule makes going forward, it would be unfair when applied retroactively to parties that didn’t know the rule before agreeing to a discovery schedule:
I accept the value of the Court’s bright-line rule, but I disagree with applying it to McDaniel’s claim. I would apply today’s decision prospectively, making it inapplicable to McDaniel or others who complied with trial court orders that altered the statutory deadline in healthcare liability suits.
Full post as published by Supreme Court of Texas Blog on March 12, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
National Practitioner Data Bank Fact
NPDB identifies unprofessional healthcare practitioners
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Wendy's International Inc.
allegedly fired illegal immigrant employees after missing a deadline to obtain legal status.
Darvocet
FDA Expert Panel Votes for Ban
Immigrant SSI
US Federal Government agrees to extend benefits in class action settlement.
Pull Vicodin, Percocet
Expert Panel Advises FDA
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation

Long Scheduled Trial Date Precludes Delay in Expert Discovery
"My Computer Ate My Homework" May Work To Extend Notice Of Appeal Deadline At Federal Level
Request Did Not Extend Time for Appealing Summary Judgment
A favorable decision on causation and late expert reports









