Quantcast

14th Court of Appeals upholds denial of doctor's motion to dismiss wrongful death case

SOUTHEAST TEXAS RECORD

Thursday, November 21, 2024

14th Court of Appeals upholds denial of doctor's motion to dismiss wrongful death case

File000704919536

HOUSTON – The 14th Court of Appeals has affirmed a lower court’s ruling denying a doctor’s motion to dismiss in a case where he is accused of medical malpractice leading to the death of a patient.

Dr. Ramakrishna Venkata Chava sought to have a suit brought against him by Joshua Hubbard, Rebecca Meason and Ann Hubbard, individually and on behalf of the estate of Jonathan Hubbard, dismissed on the grounds the suit lacked expert testimony showing causation on his alleged part related to the death of the victim.  

The April 24 opinion states Jonathan Hubbard was placed under Chava’s care after he was transferred to Kingwood Medical Center from a stand-alone emergency room over complaints of back pains.

By the time he arrived at Kingwood, the opinion states Hubbard was also experiencing nausea and vomiting, though it remains unclear if Chava ever actually treated him. Though Hubbard had been under continuous electrocardiographic monitoring in the emergency room and during transport to the hospital, he did not receive electrocardiographic monitoring on admission to the hospital, the opinion states.

Later, while still waiting to be treated, Hubbard went into full cardiac arrest and was pronounced dead a few hours later, the opinion states.

In their suit, appellees for Hubbard asserted wrongful death and gross negligence, with the expert report submitted by Dr. Paul Dlabal that stated “the fact that, the patient’s arrest occurred in the absence of observation renders it within the category of ‘unwitnessed cardiac arrest,’ which is a ‘never’ event to occur in a hospital cardiac-care setting,” the opinion states.

As for Chava directly, Dlabal added “lack of physician attendance by Dr. Chava fell outside of the applicable standards of care in the emergency situation and was a proximate cause of Jonathan’s death.”

In rendering its verdict, the three-person panel of judges noted “the report does, however, state that Dr. Chava accepted responsibility for the care of Jonathan, and it explains the standard of care applicable to a physician responsible for admitting a patient in critical condition. According to the report, it was Dr. Chava’s responsibility to see Jonathan on arrival, assess his symptoms, timely address the conditions encountered, and refer to specialty care as appropriate.”

More News