HOUSTON — The Fourteenth Court of Appeals has overruled Pro-Care Medical Center and Injury Group's only appeal issue and sided with the 189th District Court's final judgement made on November 12, 2018. Justice Meagan Hassan's opinion was affirmed and filed in early April.
Pro-Care claimed the trial court in Harris County abused it's discretion by only awarding the company $10,000 to cover the cost of attorney fess, which was significantly less than the less than the $53,194 they had asked for.
The appeal stemmed from a case against Quality Carriers, Inc., Gulf Coast Express Carriers, Inc., and Bobby Nixon. Nixon employed by Quality and Gulf Coast Carriers and was driving an eighteen-wheeler when he got into an accident with two other vehicles. Quality Carriers sued the other vehicles drivers and one vehicle's owner for claims that came from the accident. Other people in the crash got involved and sought claims against Quality Carriers. During litigation, Quality Carriers filed a motion to join Pro-Care and other parties in a lawsuit, a move they said was essential to procure certain evidence from health care providers.
Pro-Care filed an answer to Quality Carriers suit and asked the court to dismiss the case because Quality Carriers did not bring forward any accusations against them. Quality submitted an amended petition that claimed Pro-Care and other health care providers conspired to commit fraud. Pro-Care then addressed the new allegations. After more back-and-forth motions Quality Carriers nonsuited with prejudice claims against the health care providers including Pro-Care. The court granted it, and Pro-Care's attorney, Michael Kelsheimer, filed a third affidavit with 40 pages of supporting billing records that suggested cost and attorney fees had reached $53,194. After a hearing to modify the trial court granted Pro-Care $10,000, to which they appealed.
An award of attorney fees has to be supported by documentation that the fees are reasonable and necessary and a consideration left up to the 189th District Court. Quality Carriers had argued that certain billing records were heavily redacted, some didn't even include who worked on what, how long they worked on it, or what was finished.
Based on the evidence, the appeals court could not rule that the trial court abused it's discretion.