DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Coleman v. Deno, 813 So. 2d 303.

163 citing documents.

  • Jude Broussard, Et Ux. v. Lafayette Physical Rehabilitation Hospital La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
  • Broussard v. Lafayette Physical Rehabilitation Hospital, LLC 191 So. 3d 1202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    However, the Broussards argue on áppeal that the evidence was insufficient for Lafayette Rehab to meet its burden of proof, since such a finding requires an analysis of the factors set forth by our supreme court in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, 01-1519, 01-1521 (La.1/25/02), .
  • White v. Glen Retirement System 195 So. 3d 485 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth a six-part test for determining whether a negligent act by a qualified health care is covered by the MMA; 1) whether the particular wrong is treatment related or caused by a dereliction of professional skill; 2) whether the wrong requires .
  • Brandi Billeaudeau v. Opelousas General Hospital Health System La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    1/25/02), ] factors that produced a contrary conclusion.
  • Billeaudeau v. Opelousas General Hospital Authority 189 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    The trial court’s error was induced by disregarding its own analysis of the negligent credentialing claim under the Coleman v. Deno [, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), ,] factors that producéd á contrary conclusion.
  • Richard Dupuy and His Wife, Melissa Dupuy v. Nmc Operating Company, L.L.C. D/B/A the Spine Hospital of Louisiana, … 187 So. 3d 436 La. 2016
    1/25/02), and failed to follow jurisprudence holding that one of the obligations a hospital owes a patient is to provide clean and sterile facilities.
  • Porter v. Southern Oaks Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, LLC 165 So. 3d 1197 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    In support, they cite the affidavit of an RN, Jennifer Kimball, who was not a witness to the incident but opined that it “arose out of the need to provide care to Ms. Porter.” Because the nurses’ acts were for the purpose of ultimately providing healthcare, Southern Oaks argues they met the principal criterion of Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.1/25/02), , that “the particular wrong is treatment-related.” It also contends that the First Circuit’s opinion in Hamilton v. Ba *1201 ton Rouge Health C
  • Pertuit v. Jefferson Parish Hospital Service District No. 2 170 So. 3d 1106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    4 Cir. 04/25/01) , , aff'd in part, modified in part, and remanded, 01-1517 (La.01/25/02), .
  • Veronica Thomas v. Nexion Health at Lafayette, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    1/25/02), [ 1 ] were applied, the result would not change.
  • Thomas v. Nexion Health at Lafayette, Inc. 155 So. 3d 708 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Moreover, as in Andrews, supra, even if the factors set forth in Coleman [v. Deno, 01-1517, 01-1519, 01-1521 (La.1/25/02), [ 1 ] were ap *712 plied, the result would not change.
  • Campbell v. Nexion Health at Claiborne, Inc. 149 So. 3d 436 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    Defendant also argues that the trial court erred when it denied the exception of prematurity since it did not review the entirety of Plaintiffs’ allegations and further erred when it did not properly apply to those allegations the factors articulated in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Winding v. Bryan 148 So. 3d 956 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
  • Miller v. Acadian Ambulance Service, Inc. 134 So. 3d 250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Based on the requirements stated above, -16 (La.2002), set forth six factors in making a determination of whether certain conduct by a qualified health care provider constitutes “malpractice,” as defined under the LMMA: (1) whether the particular wrong is “treatment related” or caused by a dereliction of professional skill, (2) whether the wrong require
  • Andrews v. Our Lady of the Lake Ascension Community Hospital, Inc. 142 So. 3d 36 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Plaintiffs contend, however, that the alleged acts do not satisfy the six-factor test for determining whether an act is “malpractice” for purposes of the MMA as set forth by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, 01-1519, 01-1521 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Valence v. Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 128 So. 3d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
  • Burandt v. Pendleton Memorial Methodist Hospital 123 So. 3d 236 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    LaCoste , 07-0008, 07-0016, at pp. 6-7, 966 So.2d at 524 (citing Coleman v. Deno, 01- 1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), , and Williamson v. Hospital Service Dist.
  • Dutrey v. Plaquemine Manor Nursing Home 205 So. 3d 934 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    1/25/02), ; Armand, 11-1083 at p. 5, 80 So.3d at 1226 .
  • Toston v. St. Francis Medical Center, Inc. 108 So. 3d 197 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Rain CII Carbon LLC v. ConocoPhillips Co. 105 So. 3d 757 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Accordingly, we now apply the Coleman [v. Deno, pp. 17-18, (La.1/25/02), at 315-316 ] factors to the allegations asserted in the plaintiffs’ petition, as amended, which we accept as true for the purpose of resolving this dispute.
  • Battaglia v. Chalmette Medical Center, Inc. 126 So. 3d 524 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    4 Cir. 4/25/01), , aff'd in part, modified in part, and remanded, 2001-1517, 2001-1519, 2001-1521 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Hendrix v. Maison Orleans I, L.L.C. 101 So. 3d 1013 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In Richard v. Louisiana Extended Care Centers, Inc., 2002-0978, p. 13 (La.1/14/03), -469 , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: As we have previously held in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), -316 , to be covered under the MMA, the negligent act must be related to medical treatment.
  • Rivera v. Bolden's Transportation Service, Inc. 97 So. 3d 1096 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), -16 .
  • Michael & Kimberly D. McMillian v. Westwood Manor Nursing Home, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • McMillian v. Westwood Manor Nursing Home, Inc. 92 So. 3d 623 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    The McMillians argue that the acts alleged do not satisfy the test for determining whether an act is “malpractice” for purposes of the MMA set forth by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Matherne v. Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 1 90 So. 3d 534 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2012
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, (La.1/25/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth a six-part test to determine whether a negligent act is covered by the LMMA.
  • W.P. v. Universal Health Services Foundation 91 So. 3d 1097 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Delcambre, supra, citing Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Talbert v. Evans 88 So. 3d 673 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    However, in Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.1/25/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that the medical malpractice statute could not possibly exhaust every potential scenario of malpractice as defined by the Act; the Court *678 suggested six factors to assist the trier of fact in evaluating whether a claim of malpractice falls within the limited statutory definition.
  • Buford v. Williams 88 So. 3d 540 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -316 , our supreme court set out the factors to determine whether a defendant’s factions are covered under the Medical Malpractice Act: (1) whether the particular wrong alleged is “treatment related” or caused by a dereliction of professional skill; (2) whether the alleged wrongdoing requires expert medical eviden
  • Armand v. Lady of the Sea General Hospital 80 So. 3d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Russell v. Eye Associates of Northeast Louisiana 74 So. 3d 230 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    According to the trial court, it considered the factors outlined in Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.1/25/02), , and found that those Isfactors did not apply to this case.
  • Jones v. RUSTON LOUISIANA HOSP. CO., LLC 71 So. 3d 1154 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.01/25/02), .
  • Jones v. Ruston Louisiana Hospital Co., L.L.C. 71 So. 3d 1154 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.01/25/02), .
  • Mickey Atkinson v. Lammico Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    1/25/02), the supreme court enumerated a list of factors to be considered in determining whether alleged misconduct by a qualified health care provider constitutes “malpractice” under the MMA.
  • Atkinson v. Lammico Insurance Co. 63 So. 3d 1176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , the supreme court enumerated a list of factors to be considered in determining whether alleged misconduct by a qualified health care provider constitutes “malpractice” under the MMA.
  • Heacock v. Cook 60 So. 3d 624 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.01/25/02), .
  • Hamilton v. Baton Rouge Health Care 52 So. 3d 330 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -16 .
  • Scott Anthony Plaisance v. Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Ctr, Inc. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • Gordon v. Pointe Coupee Health Service District One 47 So. 3d 565 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In its opinion in LaCoste v. Pendleton Methodist Hospital, L.L.C., 07-0008, p. 6 (La.9/5/07), , our supreme court, citing Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), , emphasized again that the LMMA and its limitations on tort liability for a qualified health care provider apply only to claims “arising from medical malpractice,” and that all other tort liability on the part of the qualified health care provider is governed by general tort law.
  • Gordon v. POINTE COUPEE HEALTH SERVICE 47 So. 3d 565 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In its opinion in LaCoste v. Pendleton Methodist Hospital, L.L.C., 07-0008, p. 6 (La.9/5/07), , our supreme court, citing Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), , emphasized again that the LMMA and its limitations on tort liability for a qualified health care provider apply only to claims "arising from medical malpractice," and that all other tort liability on the part of the qualified health care provider is governed by general tort law.
  • Tina Derouen, Et Vir., Howard Derouen, III v. Park Place Surgery Center, LLC La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), (finding claim for alleged wrongful transfer from one emergency room to another of a patient whose left arm was later amputated sounded in medical malpractice); Williamson, 04-0451 at p. 5, 888 So.2d at 786.
  • Derouen v. Park Place Surgical Center, LLC 37 So. 3d 525 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), (finding claim for alleged wrongful transfer from one emergency room to another of a patient whose left arm was later amputated sounded in medical malpractice); Williamson, 04-0451 at p. 5, 888 So.2d at 786 .
  • Shondrea Dinnat and Denny Dinnat v. Dr. David Spence Texada La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    1/25/02), to determine whether the Plaintiffs’ allegation against Cabrini is “malpractice” as defined by the MMA.
  • Dinnat v. Texada 30 So. 3d 1139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    The trial court erred by failing to apply the test set forth in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , to determine whether the Plaintiffs’ allegation against Cabrini is “malpractice” as defined by the MMA.
  • Encalade v. West Jefferson Medical Center Ambulance Service 28 So. 3d 1116 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    In its written Reasons for Judgment, the trial court wrote: The Court considered the Louisiana Supreme Court case of Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, (La.1/25/02), , and finds that the six factors set forth by the Louisiana Supreme Court for determination of whether the conduct of a qualified health care provider constitutes “malpractice” has[sic] been satisfied.
  • Jeanette Hernandez v. Diversified Healthcare-Abbeville, LLC D/B/A Maison Du Monde Living Center La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.2002), - 316, the supreme court set forth the factors used to determine whether a health care provider’s conduct falls under the ambit of malpractice: (1) whether the particular wrong is “treatment related” or caused by a dereliction of professional skill, (2) whether the wrong requires expert medic
  • Hernandez v. Diversified Healthcare-Abbeville, LLC 24 So. 3d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.2002), -316 , the supreme court set forth the factors used to determine whether a health care provider’s conduct falls under the ambit of malpractice: (1) whether the particular wrong is “treatment related” or caused by a dereliction of professional skill, (2) whether the wrong requires expert medical evidence to determi
  • DURACHER v. Roy 994 So. 2d 153 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • Mineo v. UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS, LONDON 997 So. 2d 187 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    The plaintiffs opposed the motion contending that the factors set forth by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), were controlling.
  • Leonard v. STATE, DHH-RUSTON DEVEL. CENTER 975 So. 2d 662 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 15-16 (La.1/25/02), (finding claim for alleged wrongful transfer from one emergency room to another of a patient whose left arm was later amputated sounded in medical malpractice); Williamson , 04-0451 at p. 5, 888 So.2d at 786 .
  • Guillory v. Royal, Inc. 971 So. 2d 1234 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    The Louisiana Supreme Court in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , articulated several considerations for determining whether a claim is governed by the medical malpractice statute.