Professional Documents
Culture Documents
15-02252
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
4/03/2015 5:00:12 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
NINA PHAM
V.
Page 1 of 5
D/924526v2
Page 1
and protect those nurses. Plaintiff, in her pleadings and as the foundation of her claims, also
alleges that Defendant, as a corporate parent to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas
undertook, for pecuniary benefit, control of the response to the Ebola virus at Texas Health
Presbyterian Hospital Dallas, including the development of policies and procedures, including
the responsibility to train, warn, and protect nurses against the dangers of the Ebola virus and the
"Ebola response."
Plaintiff also asserts that at all times germane to the claims, she was a nurse, working in
the course and scope of her employment, and that her exposure to Ebola occurred as she carried
out her job duties. Because Plaintiff was in the course and scope of employment, Texas law
makes clear that her exclusive remedies against her employer are those remedies she may have
under the Workers' Compensation Act. TEx. LAB. CODE 408.001. Texas law also holds an
employee may have more than one employer at any given time, and the employers are those
entities that have the power, right and/or have exercised direction and control of an employee at
the time of her work-related injury.
The question of employer status for purposes of the workers' compensation act is a
question that falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of Texas Department of Insurance, Division
of Workers' Compensation ("Division"). There is no question Defendant is a subscriber to
workers compensation coverage. To that extent, whether or not Plaintiff is an employee of
Defendant for purposes of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act and subject to the exclusive
remedies of the Act is determined by the Division. Because this question is within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Division, a trial court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and must dismiss or
alternatively abate those claims that fall within the Division's exclusive jurisdiction.
Page 2 of 5
D/924526v2
Page 2
II.
ORIGINAL ANSWER
Defendant generally denies the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Original Petition and
says the same are not true in whole or in part and demands strict proof thereof.
Defendant specifically denies that its conduct was negligent or grossly negligent.
Defendant specifically denies that any act or omission by it or any of its employees or
agents gives rise to a premises liability cause of action as alleged in Plaintiff's Original Petition.
Defendant specifically denies that it or any of its employees or agents invaded Plaintiff's
privacy rights or otherwise intentionally intruded on her solitude, seclusion and private affairs in
the manner set forth in Plaintiff's Original Petition.
Defendant specifically denies that it or any of its employees or agents made fraudulent or
material misrepresentations to Plaintiff about her privacy and the need to release information.
Defendant specifically denies that it or any of its employees or agents knowingly and
intentionally misrepresented facts to Plaintiff with the intent to defraud and induce her to agree
to the release of information regarding her medical condition and views on Texas Health
Presbyterian Hospital Dallas.
Defendant invokes each of the applicable provisions of Chapter 74 of the Texas Civil
Practice and Remedies Code.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant Texas Health Resources
prays that the Court grant its Plea to the Jurisdiction and Abatement and dismiss the claims
against it with prejudice or, in the alternative, abate the case pending determination by the Texas
Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation. Subject to its Plea and the prayer
for dismissal or abatement, Defendant prays that upon final hearing and trial hereof, Plaintiff
Page 3 of 5
D/924526v2
Page 3
take nothing by her suit against Defendant and that Defendant goes hence without day and with
all costs in its behalf incurred, and for such other and further relief, special or general, at law or
in equity, to which Defendant may show itself justly entitled to receive.
Respectfully submitted,
COOPER & SCULLY, P.C.
By:
PO Box 26300
4807 Spicewood Springs Road
Bldg. 4, Suite 100
Austin, TX 78755-6300
Phone: (512) 338-5322
Faxcsimile: (512) 338-5363
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT TEXAS
HEALTH RESOURCES
Page 4 of 5
D/924526v2
Page 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 3rd day of April, 2015, a true and correct copy this document
was served on counsel of record as follows:
Via Eservice
CHARLA G. ALDOUS
caldous@aldouslaw. corn
BRENT R. WALKER
bwalker@aldouslaw. corn
HEATHER L. LONG
hlong@aldouslaw. corn
ALDOUS LAW FIRM
2311 Cedar Springs, Suite 200
Dallas, TX 75201
Page 5 of 5
D/924526v2
Page 5