News Briefs
Super Lawyers Names Six Wilson Elser Attorneys to 2025 Texas Super Lawyers and Rising Stars
September 18, 2025
Lina Al-Salim dedicates her practice to the defense of health care providers in professional liability, premises liability and administrative claims.
Lina represents hospitals, physicians, nurses and many other medical professionals and institutions across Texas in health care liability lawsuits filed in state and federal court. She also represents health care providers before their respective licensing boards, including the Texas Medical Board and Texas Board of Nursing. Lina has extensive experience representing health care institutions in the areas of negligent hiring, training and supervision of employees.
Additionally, Lina represents real estate agents and other professionals in connection with malpractice claims.
Selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® Ones to Watch™, 2026
After a five-day jury trial, John Shepperd (Partner-Houston, TX) and Lina Al-Salim (Associate-Houston, TX) obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice lawsuit pending in state district court in El Paso, Texas. The 53-year-old plaintiff was diagnosed with life-threatening blood clots in her lungs. Our client, an interventional cardiologist, placed an inferior vena cava filter to prevent future blood clots from migrating to the patient’s lungs. Months later, an attempt by another interventional cardiologist to remove the IVC filter was unsuccessful, and the filter remains in the plaintiff today. The plaintiff sued our client, contending the pulmonary emboli could have been treated successfully with oral anticoagulants, and that she was not adequately informed of the potential risks of the IVC filter or of the alternative treatment using simple anticoagulant therapy. Plaintiff also contended our client was negligent for failing to remove the IVC filter 12 days after insertion as mandated by the package insert. John and Lina contended the only alternative to the IVC filter placement was probable death, arguing that a reasonable patient would have agreed to the IVC filter placement regardless of whether informed consent was obtained. In addition, they maintained that timely removal of an IVC filter is gauged by the doctor’s clinical judgment and not the contents of a package insert. Finally, they contended the plaintiff was negligent for failing to timely seek follow-up care. Regarding damages, John and Lina provided evidence that (1) the hospital had written off $280,000 of the $300,000 bill, (2) the plaintiff provided no evidence of the cost of future medical care, (3) the plaintiff’s extensive time away from work was due to numerous medical and personal issues unrelated to her fear that the IVC filter might kill her, and (4) that plaintiff’s ongoing fear is unfounded and irrational. The jury reached a unanimous decision that our client was not negligent. Concerning informed consent, 10 of the jurors believed our client did not provide adequate consent, but all 12 agreed a reasonable patient would have consented to the IVC filter placement.
John R. Shepperd and Lina Al-Salim