Patel v. Midland Mem Hosp Med (5th Cir. 2003). · Go Syfert
Search
Patel v. Midland Mem Hosp Med (5th Cir. 2003). Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Patel
v.
Midland Mem Hosp Med
02-51202.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
May 30, 2003.
Unpublished
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS May 30, 2003
For the Fifth Circuit
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk

No. 02-51202
Summary Calendar

P V PATEL, M D, Individually; P V PATEL MD, A Professional
Association; THE HEART CENTER; ECHO LAB INC; ASSOCIATES OF MIDLAND CARDIOVASCULAR AND INTERNAL MEDICINE, also known as Midland Cardiovascul, A Professional Association,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

VERSUS

MIDLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER; MEMORIAL HEART AND VASCULAR INSTITUTE; PERMIAN CARDIOLOGY GROUP; STEPHEN BROWN, M D; MICHAEL MILLER, M D; JAY MENDEZ, M D; DONALD LOVEMAN, M D; HAROLD RUBIN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court
For the Western District of Texas, Midland
(MO-99-CV-159)

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

In July, 2002, another panel of this Court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. defendants on all of Dr. Patel’s claims and remanded this case back to the district court for a determination of defendants’ entitlement to attorneys fees and defense costs under 42 U.S.C.A. §11113 and the Texas Peer Review Statute, TEX. OCC. CODE ANN. §160.008(c). On October 23, 2002, the district court entered its order awarding attorneys fees and costs to the respective defendants in the amounts therein stated; and the Patel Plaintiffs have now appealed that order to this Court.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the supplemental brief, the record excerpts, and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated by the district court in its Order filed on October 23, 2002, we affirm the grant of attorneys fees and costs in the amounts therein stated. We decline the invitation of defendants to remand this case back to the district court again for determination of attorneys fees on this appeal. AFFIRMED.