Court Opinion

ID: 9680133
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 07:21:15.141651+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:25.800048
License: Public Domain

MEMORANDUM OPINION
BILL VANCE, Justice.
This is a health care liability action against Hill Regional Hospital relating to the death of Glendon Runnels. In accordance with Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 74.351, the Runnelses timely furnished to Hill Regional the expert reports and CVs of Jeffrey Kopita, M.D. and Debora Simmons, R.N. Hill Regional objected to the adequacy of these reports and moved to dismiss the case under subsection 74.351(0- The trial court denied the motion to dismiss, and Hill Regional appeals that order.
In a letter to the parties, we notified them of our concern that we may not have jurisdiction because the order being appealed was not an appealable interlocutory order. Both sides have briefed this jurisdictional issue.
We recently held in Lewis v. Funder-burk that an appellate court lacks jurisdiction over an attempted interlocutory appeal from order denying relief under subsection 74.351(Z). Lewis v. Funderburk, 191 S.W.3d 756, 760 (Tex.App.-Waco 2006, pet. filed). Other courts agree with us. See, e.g., Jain v. Stafford, 214 S.W.3d 94, 97 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth, 2006, no pet. h.). Others do not. See, e.g., Cayton v. Moore, 224 S.W.3d 440, 2007 WL 172069, at *2-3 (Tex.App.-Dallas Jan.24, 2007, no pet. h.); Methodist Healthcare Sys. v. Martinez-Partido, 2006 WL 1627844, at *1-2 (Tex.App.-San Antonio June 14, 2006, pet. denied) (mem.op.).
We will follow and re-affirm our precedent; we lack jurisdiction over the trial court’s interlocutory order denying Hill Regional’s motion to dismiss under subsection 74.351(Z) and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Lewis, 191 S.W.3d at 760.
Chief Justice GRAY dissenting.