Paz, et al v. Our Lady of Lourdes, et al, No. 07-31166 (5th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED August 21, 2009 No. 07-31166 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk JULIA MARITZA PAZ, Individually and on Behalf of Her Minor Children; LIONEL PAZ, Individually and on Behalf of His Minor Children, Plaintiffs-AppelleesCross-Appellants, versus OUR LADY OF LOURDES REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, INC.; LAWRENCE I. RUSSELL, Defendants-AppellantsCross-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana No. 6:01-CV-2693 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* * Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . No. 07-31166 Julia Paz sued for medical malpractice and obtained a substantial award from the jury. Both sides appeal. We have reviewed the briefs, the applicable law, and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. There is no reversible error in regard to duty of care or liability. There is sufficient evidence to support the awarded damages. The only reversible error is in the reduction of damages by the district court that resulted from the erroneous inclusion of Dr. Meza on the jury form. See La. R.S. 40:1299.41, -.47. The jury found damages of $200,000. For the remaining two defendants, 90% of that amount (which is $180,000) is awarded against the hospital, and 10% (which is $20,000) is awarded against Dr. Russell. Because of the state damage cap, the hospital must pay only $100,000 and Russell the full $20,000, leaving $80,000 to be sought from the state patient s compensation fund. See La. R.S. 40:1299.42B(2). The judgment is MODIFIED as indicated above. In all other respects, there being no reversible error, the judgment is AFFIRMED. R. 47.5.4. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.