The Mississippi Court of Appeals has affirmed a lower court's ruling in a wrongful death lawsuit against Singing River Health System. The case, filed by Marcia and Janice Hays on behalf of the beneficiaries of Curtis Hays, centered on allegations of medical malpractice following Curtis Hays' death from a heart attack in 2017. The court's decision emphasizes the importance of expert testimony in medical malpractice cases and highlights the legal obligations of plaintiffs in such lawsuits.

The court ruled on November 3, 2026, in case number 2025-CA-00544-COA, affirming the decision made by the Jackson County Circuit Court. The trial court had granted summary judgment in favor of Singing River Health System, stating that the Hays family failed to provide necessary expert testimony to support their claims.

Background

The plaintiffs, Marcia Hays and Janice Hays, filed the lawsuit after Curtis Hays, aged 66, was transferred to Singing River Health System's Emergency Department for suspected heart issues. Despite undergoing several medical procedures, including a cardiac catheterization and the insertion of an Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump, Curtis Hays ultimately died on March 21, 2017, after experiencing cardiac arrest.

The Hays family alleged that the medical staff at Singing River failed to meet the standard of care required during Curtis Hays' treatment, particularly regarding the management of the balloon pump. They claimed that the abrupt discontinuation of the balloon pump contributed to his death. The case was filed in 2018, and the hospital denied liability, asserting that the medical providers involved were independent contractors and not employees of the hospital.

The legal battle extended over several years, with the Hays family facing challenges in providing expert testimony to substantiate their claims. The hospital’s defense included a sworn affidavit stating that only two of the medical providers named in the lawsuit were hospital employees, while the others were independent contractors.

The Ruling

The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's decision, stating, "The Hayses did not support their claim for medical malpractice by expert proof showing that any employee of Singing River breached a duty owed to Mr. Hays." The court emphasized that expert testimony is crucial in establishing a prima facie case in medical malpractice cases.

The court noted that the Hays family had ample time to conduct discovery and present their case but failed to provide the necessary expert testimony to back their claims. The court stated, "While 'Rule 56(f) works as a safety valve when a nonmovant is unable to respond to summary judgment motions due to delays in discovery not fully within their control,' it 'does not protect dilatory litigants.'" This highlights the court's view that the plaintiffs had sufficient opportunity to gather evidence but did not do so.

Impact

This ruling reinforces the necessity for plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases to provide expert testimony to establish their claims. The court's decision clarifies that without expert evidence, claims of negligence cannot proceed, particularly when the employment status of medical providers is in question. The ruling may also influence future medical malpractice lawsuits in Mississippi, as it underscores the importance of timely and thorough discovery processes.

The case serves as a reminder for families pursuing wrongful death claims to ensure they have the necessary expert testimony to support their allegations. The court's decision may deter similar claims lacking substantial evidence, emphasizing the need for diligence in legal proceedings.

What's Next

The Hays family has the option to appeal the ruling to a higher court, although details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. There are currently no related cases pending that have been mentioned in the court's opinion.