Texas Citizens for a Safe Future and Clean Water and Mr. James G. Popp v. Railroad Commission of Texas and Pioneer Exploration, Ltd., (Tex.App.- Austin, May 23, 2008)(Per Curiam denial) (Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson, Puryear, Pemberton, Waldrop and Henson) 03-07-00025-CV.--Appeal from 200th District Court of Travis County
O R D E R
PER CURIAM
The Railroad Commission of Texas and Pioneer Exploration, Ltd. have each filed motions for rehearing en banc. The motions are denied.
It is ordered May 23, 2008.
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson, Puryear, Pemberton, Waldrop and Henson
Concurring Opinion by Justice Waldrop, joined by Justices Puryear and Pemberton
Concurring Opinion by Justice Pemberton, joined by Justice Waldrop
Showing posts with label en banc. Show all posts
Showing posts with label en banc. Show all posts
Sunday, June 8, 2008
En Banc: Ledesman v. Shashoua (Austin 2008)
S U P P L E M E N T A L O P I N I O N
Ms. Ledesma has filed a motion for reconsideration en banc. In addition to re-urging her arguments on original submission, Ledesma contends that her inability to obtain discovery before the 120-day expert-report deadline caused section 74.351 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to operate unconstitutionally in her case and rendered the district court's refusal to grant her a 30-day extension under 74.351(c) an abuse of discretion.
Cecelia Ledesma v. George L. Shashoua, M.D.; No. 03-05-00454-CV (Tex.App,,- Austin, May 23, 2008)(Pemberton)
Cecelia Ledesma v. George L. Shashoua, M.D.; Oakwood Women's Cenre, P.A. at Round Rock; Joseph Eddings; B. Johns, CRNA; and Round Rock Medical Center
Appeal from 277th District Court of Williamson County
As we recently suggested on rehearing in Bogar v. Esparza, "'we can certainly imagine a due process deprivation to a health care liability claimant pinned between a firm expert report deadline and a hypothetical absence of discovery tools.'" 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 3576, ___ S.W.3d ___, ___ (Tex. App.--Austin May 16, 2008, no. pet. h.) (op. on reh'g) (quoting Thoyakulathu v. Brennan, 192 S.W.3d 849, 855 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2006, no pet.)). That case has not been presented to us here. Ledesma has not fully and effectively utilized the discovery methods that section 74.351(s) allows, nor preserved any complaints regarding deprivations of such discovery.
We overrule Ms. Ledesma's motion for reconsideration en banc.
____________________________________________
Bob Pemberton, Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson, Puryear, Pemberton, Waldrop and Henson;
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Henson
Filed: May 23, 2008
Ms. Ledesma has filed a motion for reconsideration en banc. In addition to re-urging her arguments on original submission, Ledesma contends that her inability to obtain discovery before the 120-day expert-report deadline caused section 74.351 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to operate unconstitutionally in her case and rendered the district court's refusal to grant her a 30-day extension under 74.351(c) an abuse of discretion.
Cecelia Ledesma v. George L. Shashoua, M.D.; No. 03-05-00454-CV (Tex.App,,- Austin, May 23, 2008)(Pemberton)
Cecelia Ledesma v. George L. Shashoua, M.D.; Oakwood Women's Cenre, P.A. at Round Rock; Joseph Eddings; B. Johns, CRNA; and Round Rock Medical Center
Appeal from 277th District Court of Williamson County
As we recently suggested on rehearing in Bogar v. Esparza, "'we can certainly imagine a due process deprivation to a health care liability claimant pinned between a firm expert report deadline and a hypothetical absence of discovery tools.'" 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 3576, ___ S.W.3d ___, ___ (Tex. App.--Austin May 16, 2008, no. pet. h.) (op. on reh'g) (quoting Thoyakulathu v. Brennan, 192 S.W.3d 849, 855 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2006, no pet.)). That case has not been presented to us here. Ledesma has not fully and effectively utilized the discovery methods that section 74.351(s) allows, nor preserved any complaints regarding deprivations of such discovery.
We overrule Ms. Ledesma's motion for reconsideration en banc.
____________________________________________
Bob Pemberton, Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson, Puryear, Pemberton, Waldrop and Henson;
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Henson
Filed: May 23, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)