Dr Pompa Reviews

Full title: Tamisha Nicole CAMPBELL, Individually and as Guardian and Next Friend of Tamatha Nanette Williams, an Incapacitated Person, Appellant v. Paul H. POMPA, M.D. and Marcus Lesly Weatherall, M.D., Appellees

Court: Court of Appeals, Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

Date published: Aug 15, 2019

Facts

Tamisha Campbell filed health care liability claims against Dr. Paul Pompa and Dr. Marcus Weatherall, who rendered care to her mother, Tamatha Williams, shortly before she sustained severe brain injuries. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the defendants. In her first two issues, Campbell contends that the great weight of the evidence shows that Dr. Pompa did not render emergency medical care to Tamatha, and even if he did, Dr. Pompa and Dr. Weatherall acted with gross negligence sufficient to satisfy the heightened burden of proof that applies to certain emergency medical care. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 74.153. We conclude that the jury’s findings to the contrary were supported by factually sufficient evidence.

Issue

Decision

A factual-sufficiency review is a process that allows judges to correct a miscarriage of justice, even when no formula or specific standard compels the correction. Courts are told that the jury’s findings should not be disturbed unless the verdict is manifestly unjust or to shock the conscience. However, courts of appeals are told to weigh all evidence but not “reweigh it.” In this case, the facts show that no one treated Williams as if she had a severe medical condition that required immediate medical attention. While some probative evidence supports a finding that Pompa provided EMC, the majority of the evidence shows that those services did not meet the definition of EMC under the presented circumstances. The heightened standard of proof for Campbell’s claims against Pompa should not apply.

Also, Read

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

16 + 19 =