Gannon v. Wyche

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that accuracy of expert’s inferences is issue for summary judgment, not for section 74.351 motion to dismiss
• noting that whether expert’s factual inferences are accurate is question for fact finder and should not be considered when ruling on section 74.351 motion to dismiss
• “Accepting the premise that an expert’s report may not contradict the medical 18 records in such a case would preclude a plaintiff from ever being able to satisfy the expert-report requirement.”
• ―[A]ll that is required is that [the] expert report informs the defendants of the specific conduct the plaintiffs have called into question and provides a basis for the trial court to conclude that the claims have merit.‖
• “[A]ll that is required is that [the] expert report informs the defendants of the specific conduct the plaintiffs have called into question and provides a basis for the trial court to conclude that the claims have merit.”
• “[T]he health-care liability statutes do not require a single expert to address all liability and causation issues and the expert reports should be read together when determining whether they represent a good-faith effort to satisfy the statutory requirements.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).