Professional Negligence Law Reporter

A Louisiana appellate court held that a trial court had not erred in granting a dentist’s dilatory exception of prematurity in a case brought by a patient who was injured when an examination lamp fell on her during an appointment.

Cynthia Peed was seated in an examination chair during a dental appointment at Cherie LeSaicherre’s office. An overhead light fell, striking Peed’s face and eye, which required multiple surgeries. Peed sued LeSaicherre and her practice, among others. LeSaicherre filed an exception of prematurity, claiming that the plaintiff’s allegations fell under the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act (LMMA) and required review by a medical review panel. The plaintiff opposed the exception on the basis that her claims sounded in negligence, not medical negligence. The trial court sustained the exception and dismissed the suit without prejudice. The court then denied the plaintiff’s subsequent motion for a new trial.

Affirming, the appellate court found that a medical malpractice claim against a qualified health care provider is subject to dismissal on a timely exception of prematurity where a pre-lawsuit medical review panel has not first reviewed the claim. Citing case law, the court added that any conduct by a health care provider during medical treatment that can reasonably fall within the definition of the LMMA must be handled under its procedures.

Applying these principles here, the court found that LeSaicherre and her practice were qualified health care providers at the time of the incident and met all the LMMA’s statutory requirements, including enrolling in the state Patient’s Compensation Fund and obtaining necessary insurance. The plaintiff did not allege a specific defect in the examination light, the court said, and did not allege the dentist committed any intentional acts.

Consequently, the trial court properly held that the plaintiff’s claims required review by a medical review panel. The court noted that the plaintiff’s medical review panel complaint had already been filed and was ongoing, preventing a miscarriage of justice as a result of the court’s ruling.

Citation: Peed v. LeSaicherre, 2024 WL 4661779 (La. Ct. App. Nov. 4, 2024).