Health Care Law

In addition to our strong commitment to the defense of medical malpractice claims against physicians, hospitals and their insurers, Bradley Murchison attorneys provide representation across the spectrum of legal issues affecting the health care industry. The diverse backgrounds and depth of experience of our attorneys permit the firm to ably manage clients' concerns and to provide full-service health care law representation. We field a multidisciplinary health care law team of attorneys with experience in the substantive areas of business, employee relations, administrative law, contracting, Medicare, and professional liability, to name a few. Whether it be with regard to the roles, responsibilities, and liabilities of the members of the governing body of a hospital or to advice regarding alternative health care delivery systems, such as HMOs, PPOs, and third-party administrators, our attorneys bring a tested knowledge and successful practice to this area of law. As today's health care systems grow more complex, a client's needs might include the credentialing of practitioners, licensure and regulation of hospitals, Medicare payment issues, antitrust matters, labor relations, or the bioethical issues involving health care providers and their patients. Whatever the health care law needs, our attorneys are there to guide, assist, and represent our clients' interests.

Representative Matters

  • Defense of the insurer and physicians who were sued after performing a total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Plaintiff sued claiming a lack of informed consent as to all alternative therapies for the treatment of the fibroids, causing a perforation of the bowel and a failure to check the bowel during surgery, a failure to close the wound adequately at the site of an umbilical hernia, and misdiagnosis and/or delayed diagnosis of the bowel perforation. After a 2-day bench trial, Judge Michael Clement of the Twenty-Fifth Judicial District Court in Plaquemines Parish ruled in favor of all the defendants, dismissing plaintiff’s action with prejudice.
  • Defense of a CRNA on behalf of the insurer in a case where plaintiffs, the patient’s surviving children, claimed that a CRNA and an anesthesiologist improperly handled their mother’s induction, intubation and resuscitation, leading to anoxic encephalopathy and death. After a 5-day trial, a civil jury in Jefferson Parish ruled in favor of all defendants, dismissing plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.
  • Defendants obtained a unanimous verdict in a medical malpractice case tried to a jury in Jefferson Parish. Defense of an OB/GYN against allegations that he failed to timely identify and diagnose breast cancer, resulting in the plaintiff having to undergo a total mastectomy. After a four day trial, the jury deliberated less than two hours before ruling in favor of our client, dismissing plaintiff’s action.
  • Defense of an anesthesiologist who had inadvertently placed a central line in the patient's subclavian artery rather than in her subclavian vein. The patient subsequently suffered a stroke and died days later. The Acadia Parish jury deliberated for under an hour before ruling in favor of the anesthesiologist, dismissing plaintiffs' action. A unanimous defense verdict obtained in a medical malpractice case tried to a jury in Acadia Parish.
  • Defense of a general surgeon who performed gallbladder removal which resulted in a severed bile duct. At trial, the patient argued that the injury caused pain and suffering, required surgical repair, and rendered the patient at a greater risk for future abdominal complications. The defense responded that the injury was a known risk of the procedure which could not reasonable be prevented, and to which the physician responded in a timely and appropriate manner. The Jefferson Parish jury deliberated for approximately three hours before ruling in favor of the general surgeon, dismissing plaintiff’s action.
  • Representation of a hospital in an EMTALA action whereby the plaintiff initially alleged that he had been improperly discharged from the hospital ER without being medically screened and stabilized. On appeal, he alleged that the trial court erred when it found plaintiff’s claims were “standard of care issues” and when it failed to allow plaintiff additional discovery. The Court of Appeals found on error on the party of the district judge and affirmed the Summary Judgment.
  • Defense of a general surgeon who was alleged to have unnecessarily delayed in taking a patient to surgery and then alleged to have used improper surgical technique in attempting to decompress the patient’s colon. The patient expired during surgery and could not be revived. The jury deliberated for under an hour before ruling in favor of the defendant surgeon, dismissing plaintiffs' action.


SHREVEPORT, LA 71101-5529
P: (318) 227-1131
F: (318) 227-1141

New Orleans

1100 POYDRAS, SUITE 2700
P: (504) 596-6300
F: (504) 596-6301

Baton Rouge

301 MAIN ST., SUITE 2100
P: (225) 490-5000
F: (225) 490-5001

Copyright 2015 Bradley Murchison Kelly & Shea LLC. All Rights Reserved
Designed and Developed by Synapse Development Group