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.

  • Sandra Guillory v. Royal, Inc. D/B/A Valley View Health Care 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.
  • Duplessis v. Tulane University 972 So. 2d 387 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18, (La.1/25/02), -16 , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth a six-part test to determine whether a claim sounds in medical malpractice and must proceed in accordance with the LMMA or whether the claim sounds in general negligence and should proceed under general tort law.
  • Schiro v. ACADIAN AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC. 970 So. 2d 677 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    Williamson v. Hospital Service District No. 1 of Jefferson, *681 supra ; Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Berthelot v. Patients' Compensation Fund Oversight Board 977 So. 2d 967 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    Thereafter, the supreme court reversed and reinstated the trial court’s denial of Pendleton’s exception, holding that the Katrina-related death claim in that particular case did not sound in medical malpractice (applying the six factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), -316 ).
  • Lafonta v. Hotard Coaches, Inc. 969 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    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.
  • LaCoste v. Pendleton Methodist Hosp. 966 So. 2d 519 La. 2007
    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 .
  • Curtis Randall v. Concordia Nursing Home D/B/A Camelot Leisure Living La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    ..” In Coleman v. Deno, 00-1517 (La.1/25/02), our Louisiana Supreme Court used six factors to determine whether a claim is covered under the Medical Malpractice Act.
  • Randall v. Concordia Nursing Home 965 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , our Louisiana Supreme Court used six factors to determine whether a claim is covered under the Medical Malpractice Act.
  • Munson v. LAKEWOOD QUARTERS LT. PARTNERSHIP 965 So. 2d 448 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    The Richard court cited with approval the following six-part test of Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), -316 , for determining whether a negligent act by a health care provider is covered under the MMA: (1) Whether the particular wrong is "treatment related" or caused by dereliction of professional skill; (2) whether the wrong requires expert medical evidence to determine whether the appropriate standard of care was
  • Blevins v. Hamilton Medical Center, Inc. 959 So. 2d 440 La. 2007
    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 patient whose left arm was amputated following transfer sounded in malpractice); Williamson , 04-0451 at p. 5, 888 So.2d at 786 .
  • LaCoste v. PENDLETON METHODIST HOS., LLC 947 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, 01-1519, 01-1521, p. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -16 , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth a six-part test to determine whether a claim sounds in medical malpractice and must first be presented to a medical review panel: (1) whether the particular wrong is "treatment related" or caused by a dereliction of professional skill, (2) whether the wrong requires expe
  • Lydia Eldridge v. Heritage Manor, L. L. C. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    1/25/02), -316 (footnote ommitted).
  • Eldridge v. Heritage Manor, LLC 942 So. 2d 743 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -316 (footnote omitted).
  • Salvant v. State 935 So. 2d 646 La. 2006
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02) .
  • Crum v. State 931 So. 2d 400 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, 01-1521 (La.1/25/02), , the supreme court, applying the MMA, considered the following factors in determining whether a particular act constituted malpractice or an ordinary tort action: (1) whether the particular wrong is "treatment related" or caused by a dereliction of professional skill, (2) whether the wrong requires expert medical evi
  • Davis v. ST. FRANCISVILLE COUNTRY MANOR 928 So. 2d 549 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    In Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, XXXX-XXXX, XXXX-XXXX, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -316 , the Supreme Court set forth six factors to be considered in determining whether alleged negligent conduct by a qualified health care provider constitutes malpractice.
  • Fagan v. LeBlanc 928 So. 2d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    Pfiffner , 94-0924 at 9, 643 So.2d at 1234 ; see also Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, p. 20 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Fagan v. LeBlanc 928 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    Pfiffner , 94-0924 at 9, 643 So.2d at 1234 ; see also Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, p. 20 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Wilson v. Invacare Corp. 920 So. 2d 393 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    To determine whether a claim against a qualified health care provider is subject to dismissal for want of adhering to the procedural dictates of the MMA, the trial court should examine the claim in light of the factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.01/25/02), .
  • Buelle v. Periou 927 So. 2d 1126 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    Because we have concluded that Ms. Buelle was not a "patient" of Dr. Periou, it is unnecessary to apply the six factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, XXXX-XXXX, XXXX-XXXX, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -16 , for determining whether allegations of injury constitute "malpractice" under the MMA.
  • LT v. Chandler 917 So. 2d 753 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    40:1299.41A(7) and (9); Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), .
  • Jackson v. DeSOTO RETIREMENT AND REHAB. 917 So. 2d 727 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), -316 , the supreme court set forth a six-part test to determine whether a negligent act by a health care provider is covered under the MMA: (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 determine w
  • Meseke v. St. Francis Medical Center 914 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    In order to help determine whether the circumstances of a particular case, as alleged in a petition, fall under the LMMA, the Louisiana Supreme Court supplied several factors to consider in Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.01/25/02), , 316: (1) Whether the particular wrong is “treatment related” or caused by a dereliction of professional skill; |r(2) Whether the wrong requires expert medical evidence to determine whether the appropriate standard of care was breached; (3) Whether the pertinent act or
  • Quinney v. Summit of Alexandria 903 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.01/25/02), , the supreme court set forth six factors to be considered in determining whether plaintiffs' claims lie in malpractice or the NHRBR.
  • Richard Quinney v. the Summit of Alexandria La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.01/25/02), the supreme court set forth six factors to be considered in determining whether plaintiffs’ claims lie in malpractice or the NHRBR.
  • Muse v. Lane Memorial Hosp. Foundation 916 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    Describing Lane Memorial Hospital's conduct as non-medical, and relying on Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), , the Muses urge it is not malpractice as defined by the MMA.
  • Womack v. Autumn Leaves Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, LLC 902 So. 2d 1280 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    Following the lead of Richard, supra, the Henry court examined the plaintiffs’ claims under the six factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.01/25/02), , for determining whether the conduct of a qualified health care provider constitutes medical malpractice, and stated: First, we find that changing a diaper is not medical treatment.
  • Rogers v. HICKORY MANOR NURSING & REHABIL. 902 So. 2d 1150 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    In Henry, supra, this court applied the factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), , in determining whether a claim lies in medical malpractice or the NHRBR.
  • Womack v. AUTUMN LEAVES NURS. & REHAB. CEN. 902 So. 2d 1280 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    Following the lead of Richard, supra, the Henry court examined the plaintiffs' claims under the six factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.01/25/02), , for determining whether the conduct of a qualified health care provider constitutes medical malpractice, and stated: First, we find that changing a diaper is not medical treatment.
  • Furlow v. Woodlawn Manor, Inc. 900 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    In Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, XXXX-XXXX, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set out the six-factor test for determining whether alleged negligent conduct by a qualified health care provider constitutes "malpractice."
  • Burks v. Christus Health Monroe 899 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    This court in Henry applied the factors set forth in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), , in determining whether a claim lies in malpractice or the NHRBR.
  • Nash v. Brown 898 So. 2d 619 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • John David Nash v. David J. Brown, M.D. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • Henry v. West Monroe Guest House, Inc. 895 So. 2d 680 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.01/25/02), , the supreme court set forth six factors to be considered in determining whether plaintiffs' claims lie in malpractice or the NHRBR.
  • Delcambre v. Blood Systems, Inc. 893 So. 2d 23 La. 2005
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, p. 16 (La.1/25/02), ; Spradlin at pp. 6-7 , 758 So.2d at 120 .
  • Wild v. NS'NG, INC. 898 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    Coleman v. Deno , 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Williamson v. HOSPITAL SERVICE OF JEFFERSON 888 So. 2d 782 La. 2004
    1/25/02), , and affirmed the ruling of the district court granting the defendant's exception of prematurity.
  • Taylor v. Christus Health Southwestern La. 886 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    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.
  • John Henry Taylor, Et Ux. v. Christus Health Southwestern Louisiana La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    2 1/25/02), articulated several considerations for determining whether a claim is governed by the medical malpractice statute.
  • Bickham v. Inphynet, Inc. 899 So. 2d 15 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    See Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -316 .
  • Romero v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 870 So. 2d 474 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    The supreme court set forth the following factors in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), : (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 determine whether the appropriate standard of care was breached, and (3) whether the pertinent act or omission involved assessment of the patient's condi
  • Williams v. Memorial Medical Center 870 So. 2d 1044 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    Pfiffner , 94-0924 at p. 9, 643 So.2d at 1234 ; see also Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX, p. 20 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Miller v. Nursing Homes Mgmt., Inc. 867 So. 2d 1000 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    The court stated that in Coleman v. Deno, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/25/02), , it set forth a six-part test to determine whether a negligent act by a health care provider is covered under the MMA: (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 determine whether the appropriate s
  • Williamson v. Hospital Service District No. 1 of Jefferson 866 So. 2d 962 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    The Court expanded on these factors in Coleman v. Deno, 2001-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Terry v. Red River Center Corp. 862 So. 2d 1061 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    In analyzing whether the conduct at issue constitutes medical treatment for the purpose of being covered by the MMA, the Richard court cited with approval the six-part test of Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , for determining whether a negligent act by a health care provider is covered under the MMA, to wit: 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 determine whether the
  • Jordan v. STONEBRIDGE 862 So. 2d 181 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    Jordan opposed the motion, relying on two Louisiana Supreme Court cases, Richard v. Louisiana Extended Care Centers, Inc., 02-0978 (La.1/14/03), and Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), .
  • Rachal v. Tenet Healthcare Systems 860 So. 2d 1175 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    *1178 Harris, supra at p. 6, 819 So.2d at 1138 , citing Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, 01-1521, pp. 8-9 (La.1/25/02), .
  • McKnight v. D & W HEALTH SERVICES, INC. 873 So. 2d 18 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517, pp. 17-18 (La.1/25/02), -16 .
  • Hinson v. the Glen Oak Retirement System 853 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    In Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.01/25/02), -316 , the supreme court set forth a six-part test to determine whether a negligent act by a health care provider is covered under the MMA: (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 determine w
  • McLemore v. WESTWOOD MANOR NURS. AND REHAB. 852 So. 2d 1170 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    The court cited with approval the six-part test of Coleman v. Deno, 01-1517 (La.1/25/02), , for determining whether a negligent act by a health care provider is covered under the MMA: (1) Whether the particular wrong is "treatment related" or caused by dereliction of professional skill; (2) Whether the wrong requires expert medical evidence to determine whether the appropriate standard of care was breached