Brandi’s parents allege that they rushed her to the Opelousas General Hospital ER and asked Dr. Z to administer stroke medication, but Dr. Z declined, administering anti-seizure medication instead.  Frustrated, they transferred her to another hospital, which administered stroke medication over four hours after she had experienced what was ultimately determined to be a stroke.  She suffered severe, irreversible brain damage.

The parents sued OGH and Dr. Z over the incident.  The potential recovery against OGH is limited by the Louisiana cap on medical malpractice recovery, right?  Wrong, according to the La. Supreme Court’s Oct. 19 decision.

The claim against OGH included a claim for “negligent credentialing” of Dr. Z.  The parents moved for summary judgment on their request for a declaration that the claim was not subject to the cap.  The court granted the motion, focusing on the legislature’s failure to include “negligent hiring” within the definition of malpractice.  The appellate court found no error in the ruling.  On Oct. 19 the La. Supreme Court affirmed, basing its decision on a six-factor test laid down in an earlier La. Supreme Court opinion.

The statutory definition of “malpractice” includes “the training or supervision of health care providers.”  OGH argued that “negligent credentialing” falls within “training or supervision of health care providers,” but the court expressly rejected the argument.

So Brandi’s parents had a clear victory, and OGH a clear loss.  But the case is far from over.  There has been no determination that Dr. Z was actually negligent in her treatment of Brandi or that OGH was actually negligent in credentialing Dr. Z.  Those factual issues have yet to be tried.  Nevertheless, the opinion opens a clear path for circumventing the med mal cap in Louisiana.

The case is Billeaudeau v. Opelousas Gen. Hosp. Auth, No. 2016-C-0846 (La., Oct. 19, 2016).