CHARLES TAYLOR, JR., ET UX. VERSUS DR. RICHARD CLEMENT, ET AL.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 12-996 consolidated with 12-995 CHARLES TAYLOR, JR., ET UX. VERSUS DR. RICHARD CLEMENT, ET AL. ********** APPEAL FROM THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF CALCASIEU, NO. 1999-191 C/W 1997-4329 HONORABLE CLAYTON DAVIS, DISTRICT JUDGE ********** MARC T. AMY JUDGE ********** Court composed of Ulysses Gene Thibodeaux, Chief Judge, Jimmie C. Peters, and Marc T. Amy, Judges. AFFIRMED. MOTION FOR EN BANC HEARING DENIED. Thibodeaux, Chief Judge, specially concurs. Stephen M. Pizzo 3421 N. Causeway Boulevard, Suite 900 Metairie, LA 70002 (504) 831-4091 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE: Galen-Med, Inc. J. Elliott Baker Special Assistant Attorney General 321 N. Vermont Street, Suite 208 Covington, LA 70433 (985) 867-9068 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS/APPELLEES: State of Louisiana Galen-Med, Inc. Nadia de la Houssaye Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, CarrÑ re & DenÑ gre, L.L.P. Post Office Drawer 3408 Lafayette, LA 70502-3408 (337) 593-7600 COUNSEL FOR INTERVENOR/APPELLEE: Louisiana Patient s Compensation Fund Oliver Jackson Schrumpf Schrumpf & Schrumpf 3801 Maplewood Drive Sulphur, LA 70663 (337) 625-9077 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS: Susan Arrington Laura Jo Arrington Joelle Lorene Arrington Sharon Taylor Charles Taylor, Jr. AMY, Judge. For the reasons expressed in the consolidated case of Susan Arrington v. ER Physician Group, 12-995 (La.App. 3 Cir. _/_/13), _ So.3d _, the judgment of the trial court, rendered on June 18, 2012 is affirmed. The motion for en banc hearing is denied. All costs of this proceeding are assessed to the plaintiffs-appellants. AFFIRMED. MOTION FOR EN BANC HEARING DENIED. STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 12-995 SUSAN ARRINGTON, ETC. VERSUS ER PHYSICIAN GROUP, INC., ET AL. (Consolidated With) 12-996 CHARLES TAYLOR, JR., ET UX. VERSUS DR. RICHARD CLEMENT, ET AL. THIBODEAUX, Chief Judge, specially concurring. I still maintain my position that the medical malpratice cap is unconstitutional on the bases of equal protection, due process, and separation of powers. However, I must sacrifice my intellectual independence and judicial beliefs to what is the clear pronouncement of the Louisiana Supreme Court in Oliver v. Magnolia Clinic, 11-2132 (La. 3/13/12), 85 So.3d 39.
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.
