Earlier this week, I saw a blog post over at Reverse and Render, an appellate blog focused on the Dallas Court of appeals, titled “Laser Hair Care Removal Is Not a Health Care Liability Claim”. Knowing that the scope of the health-care-liability statute is a hot-button issue up at the Texas Supreme Court, I decided to read on.
The post talks about Bioderm Skin Care, LLC v. Sok, No. 10-05-00044-CV (Tex. App.—Dallas Jun. 28, 2011). In that case, the Dallas Court sided with the Fort Worth Court and the Corpus Christi–Edinburg Court in concluding that Texas’s health-care-liability reform statute did not include claims related to laser hair removal. (( Here’s a link if you’re really wanting to read more about laser hair removal. )) The opinion noted that the opposite result had been reached by the Fourteenth Court and the Amarillo Court.
With that in mind, the blog post concludes:
Given the conflict between the intermediate courts of appeals, this case would seem to be a likely candidate for review by the Texas Supreme Court.
After doing a little poking around in the Court’s docket, it looks like the Court is one step ahead. It turns out, one of the cases cited favorably by the Dallas Court (Ghazali v. Brown, out of Fort Worth) is already the subject of a petition for review — and asks about the question of laser hair removal. The Court granted that petition last spring and has just set it for the first date on the fall argument calendar, September 13, 2011. Ghazali v. Brown, No. 10-0232.
If the Bioderm Skin Care case makes it to the Texas Supreme Court, it will almost certainly spend some time in the “hold” pile as we await the outcome of Ghazali.