Texas Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Texas Emergency Room Doctor

On January 11, the Texas Supreme Court delivered a favorable ruling in support of Dr. Kristy Marsillo, an emergency room physician, stating that the plaintiff failed to provide evidence of willful and wanton negligence in the treatment of a snakebite—a required standard in emergency care cases. The case involved thirteen-year-old Raynee Dunnick, who was treated at Seton Medical Center Hays for a rattlesnake bite on her left foot.

Dr. Marsillo promptly followed the hospital's snakebite treatment plan, monitored vital signs, ordered blood work, and assessed the severity of the injury before administering antivenom. Despite Raynee's gradual worsening condition, the infusion eventually led to improvement, and she was discharged the next day on crutches.

The Dunnick family sued Dr. Marsillo, alleging delayed antivenom administration caused complications and sought one million dollars in damages. Medical literature suggested the antivenom is effective within six hours, but the court acknowledged associated risks. Dr. Marsillo, mindful of the progression of swelling, determined the need for antivenom.

Initially dismissed by the trial judge, the case was reinstated by the Court of Appeals, claiming a "possibility" of Dr. Marsillo's knowing negligence. The Texas Supreme Court, however, overturned this decision, emphasizing the absence of credible evidence for willful and wanton negligence. TCEP submitted an amicus brief supporting Dr. Marsillo, joined by organizations including the Texas Alliance for Patient Access, Texas Hospital Association, Texas Medical Association, and the Texas Osteopathic Medical Association.

TAPA argued Dr. Marsillo's treatment aligned with accepted guidelines and demonstrated conscious care, emphasizing her adherence to the hospital's snakebite protocol. The Texas Supreme Court concurred with TAPA/TCEP, rejecting the Court of Appeals' ruling and reinstating the trial court's dismissal.

This decision holds significance for emergency care providers, establishing the necessity for plaintiffs to prove willful and wanton treatment in medical malpractice lawsuits involving emergency care, recognizing the unique challenges and split-second decisions inherent in such settings.