Patterson v. Claiborne Operator Group — nursing-home claims must go to a medical review panel

Case
Paula Patterson, Jon Crumpler and Carey Crumpler, Individually and on Behalf of Their Mother, Anita Carey, Deceased v. Claiborne Operator Group, L.L.C., and Paramount Healthcare Consultants, L.L.C., both d/b/a Claiborne Rehabilitation Center
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit
Judge
Cox; Marcotte; Ellender
Date Decided
August 26, 2026
Docket No.
56,993-CA
Topics
Medical malpractice; Nursing homes; Prematurity; Medical review panels
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Anita Carey was a resident of Claiborne Rehabilitation Center from May 2021 until her hospitalization in October 2021. Her children alleged that she developed an infected Stage IV pressure injury and suffered dehydration, malnutrition, sepsis, acute renal failure, and brain damage before her death in December 2021.

The family sought a medical review panel and also filed suit. In an earlier appeal, the Second Circuit held that most allegations concerned medical malpractice, but allowed amendment of limited claims concerning nutrition, hydration, and diapering that might arise outside a treatment plan or physician orders. The family amended its petition, alleging that the facility intentionally and fraudulently failed to provide basic custodial necessities, including food, water, hygiene items, working equipment, linens, and adequate staff. The trial court again sustained the providers’ exception of prematurity.

The Court’s Holding

The Second Circuit affirmed. The amended allegations remained claims about the degree and adequacy of care provided to Carey, including staffing, staff training, equipment, supplies, pressure-injury prevention, hydration, nutrition, and hygiene. Those claims fall within the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act and must first be presented to a medical review panel.

The court held that recasting the alleged failures as intentional conduct or fraud did not change their substance. The petition offered broad and conclusory assertions rather than facts showing that defendants consciously desired Carey’s injuries or knew they were substantially certain to result. Its fraud allegations likewise did not establish an intentional tort outside the Act.

Key Takeaways

  • Nursing-home claims centered on staffing and adequacy of resident care generally sound in medical malpractice.
  • Calling inadequate care “intentional” or “fraudulent” does not avoid the medical-review-panel requirement without specific facts establishing the required intent.
  • After the prior remand, the amended petition did not specifically plead nutrition, hydration, or diapering failures outside a treatment plan or physician orders.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces that the substance of a nursing-home claim—not its label—controls whether the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act applies. Claims alleging inadequate personnel, resources, equipment, or care for a resident’s medical needs ordinarily require medical-review-panel review before suit may proceed.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

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

Scroll to Top