Articles Tagged with medical malpractice lawyer

This week, a North Carolina jury awarded $7.5 million to a gentleman whose botched colon surgery left him with severe and debilitating complications. In June of 2010, the patient underwent surgery to remove a portion of his colon due to a potentially cancerous mass that had been found. It was alleged that when the surgeon connected the new ends of the colon together, there was a leak. The patient in this case became extremely ill following the surgery. He suffered from a prolonged period of low blood pressure as well as kidney failure, infection and internal bleeding. He also underwent two additional surgeries during which his physicians were unable to locate the source of the infection. A colonoscopy later that same year revealed a leak in the area where a portion of the colon had been resected. A fourth surgery was then performed to repair the leak and mitigate the resulting internal damage.

When a perforation occurs in the gastrointestinal tract, substances such as fecal matter, food and bacteria can leak in to the abdominal cavity which can cause infection, organ damage and even death. Perforations of the colon can happen on their own but, more commonly, occur during surgeries in the abdomen. Symptoms of a colon injury include fever, pain, increased heartbeat, increased respiratory rate and distension of the abdomen. Generally speaking, a perforated colon can be diagnosed using the CT Scan technology that is available today.

Often times, the defense in these types of cases is that the perforation – and the resultant leak – in and of itself is not a breach of the standard of acceptable medical care. While the truth of this defense depends on the circumstances, a good medical malpractice attorney can get around this argument by showing that a delay in diagnosing the perforation and leak resulted in unnecessary harm and damages.

A Kansas jury recently found that a Kansas doctor and pain clinic were guilty of medical malpractice that caused the death of a 40-year-old man, and awarded the Missouri family nearly $3 million.

The medical malpractice suit stems from a series a steroid injections beginning in May 2008. The patient, who suffered chronic lower back pain, visited a Kansas pain clinic in early 2008. In May, one of the physicians who operated the clinic injected medication into the patient’s back. This alleviated his pain for a while, but in December the patient was back in the clinic for a second round of injections. Unfortunately, those injections failed, and the patient returned to the clinic on January 5, 2009. The original treating physician was on vacation, so another operating physician attended to the patient. This physician administered an epidural steroid injection in the patient’s lower back. Soon after, the patient’s pain still had not subsided, and a lump started to appear where the needle had gone in. The medical malpractice suit states that the patient complained that the lump hurt but was told by the clinic that minor swelling at the injection site was normal.

About a week later, the patient went back to the clinic for another injection. According to the medical malpractice suit, at this time the patient told a nurse about the lump and the pain around it. After checking with the physician, the nurse said it was no problem.

A person who is injured expects to receive adequate care and treatment from doctors and medical staff. Patients certainly do not expect that they will walk out of a hospital or doctor’s office in a worse condition than when they arrived. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happened in a recent medical malpractice case in New York.

Almost ten years ago, a New York man slipped on some steps as he made his way into work as a public safety dispatcher, breaking one of his ankles. He subsequently sought treatment for his injury from a doctor at an orthopedic practice. Later, he began experiencing significant pain on the side of his foot near his little toe. This intense pain prompted him to seek treatment from another doctor. From 2005 to 2009, a surgeon at a knee center began performing surgeries on his little toe in hopes of alleviating the patient’s pain. Eventually, however, the surgeon amputated the patient’s little toe.

Sometime after this amputation, the patient developed an infection, and the doctor was forced to amputate the fourth toe. The patient’s pain persisted, and in July 2009 the knee surgeon amputated the leg just below the knee. Once again, the patient developed another post-surgical infection which required the amputation of the remaining leg above the knee. After these surgeries in 2009, the patient no longer was able to work. In all, the patient underwent twelve surgeries from various doctors in New York. Following all of these surgeries, the patient filed a medical malpractice suit against his treating doctors and surgeons.

Patients expect that their doctors will take good care of them and do whatever necessary to stabilize or treat their condition. However, one doctor – an orthopedic surgeon – recently was found guilty of medical malpractice when his actions led to his patient becoming a paraplegic; the jury awarded the patient and his wife $2.85 million.

The patient presented to the emergency room in the spring of 2004 after he suffered numerous and severe injuries in an automobile accident. While being prepped for surgery to stop the bleeding in his forearm, the treating orthopedic surgeon ordered a CT scan of the patient’s knee, which he also injured in the accident. According to the trial testimony, when the physician ordered the CT scan, the patient’s blood pressure was at a dangerously low level. The CT scan caused a nearly 30-minute delay in the patient’s surgery. During this delay, the patient went into cardiac arrest and respiratory arrest. Although two physicians nearby – an emergency room doctor and an anesthesiologist – fortunately resuscitated the patient, the delay and resulting injuries led to the death of a portion of his spinal cord, also known as a spinal cord stroke. Tragically, he suffered permanent paralysis from just above the waist down.

According to the lawyers and experts who testified at the trial, the patient’s extremely low blood pressure should have alerted doctors and nurses that he was on the verge of a cardiac arrest and that to interrupt the necessary treatment of the patient’s arm was negligent. Several doctors further testified that the patient should not have been transferred from the pre-operative holding area when his vital signs were as low as they were – even the experts for the defendant physician. Various witness accounts and medical records also presented at trial revealed that the patient’s blood pressure and pulse remained at zero after the cardiac arrest, leaving his body without blood flow for approximately eight to twenty-seven minutes.

A New York jury in a medical malpractice recently found that a pediatric endocrinologist was guilty of medical negligence that caused the wrongful death of a six-year-old girl, and awarded the mother an $8 million verdict. Sadly, the girl died shortly after a non-board certified pediatric endocrinologist misdiagnosed her diabetes.

This defendant doctor was recommended by the girl’s pediatrician, who thought she may have had diabetes. After administering a blood test, the specialist jumped to the conclusion that the girl had pre-Type 2 diabetes; she prescribed a regimen of weight loss and exercise. Following this initial misdiagnosis, the specialist failed to order a blood test at a second visit, and the girl became gravely ill about a month later. When the girl’s blood sugar eventually was tested at the ER, it was found to be five times higher than the normal limits. Unfortunately, all she really needed was insulin, but because her doctor misdiagnosed her with Type 2 diabetes, instead of Type 1 diabetes, she ended up not getting the insulin she needed and died.

At trial, doctors said there were other signs that the girl had Type 1 diabetes and asserted that the doctor’s negligence in failing to administer the girl insulin caused the girl’s wrongful death. One diabetes expert testified that when a six-year-old has diabetes, there is a 99.99 percent chance it is Type 1. This is crucial, as Type 1 require insulin; Type 2 normally can be treated with diet and exercise.

For a parent, one of the greatest fears is that something bad will happen to their child. Mothers take special care when pregnant to ensure that their child is born healthy and will develop correctly. However, one thing that mothers cannot avoid is the risk of complications during the birthing process.

Last month, a Pennsylvania jury awarded $4 million when it found an obstetrician’s medical negligence caused permanent injuries to a child. The child, now four years old, suffers cerebral palsy and neurological injuries as a result of the obstetrician’s negligent failure to perform a cesarean section after the mother’s labor stalled for nearly eight hours. An expert witness testified that the doctor should have recognized that when the child’s labor stopped progressing, a cesarean delivery was safer. Instead, the doctor proceeded with a vaginal delivery and used forceps to assist in the delivery. During the delivery, the baby’s shoulder became stuck in her mother’s pelvis, causing a crucial three-and-a-half minute delay when the baby was deprived of oxygen. As a result, the baby had to be resuscitated by the neonatal intensive care unit at the hospital and later underwent a procedure to cool her brain to minimize damage from the lack of oxygen. The verdict came after a four-day trial and is among the largest medical malpractice awards in the county’s history.

Maryland obstetricians are required to use reasonable care during the delivery of a child and when they fail to do so are responsible for the injuries their medical malpractice causes. Any parent whose child has suffered from birth injuries may be able to take legal action such as this woman did in the hopes of being compensated for the lifetime of medical bills that their child will incur.

Recently, in a medical malpractice wrongful death case in Harford County, Maryland, a jury awarded more than $958,000 to the family of a woman who died after receiving “excessive amounts” of pain medication during a hospital stay. According to the lawsuit, the woman’s death resulted from the hospital providing hospice care rather than standard treatment for her infected ulcers.

In February 2010, the decedent, Beverly Ann Gargiulo, was admitted to Upper Chesapeake Health Center seeking treatment for ulcers that reportedly had become infected. The hospital allegedly told Mrs. Gargiulo she would need hospice care but never communicated that information to her family. During her treatment, Mrs. Gargiulo reportedly received large amounts of narcotics, including morphine and oxycodone, in increasing amounts and with increasing frequency. The family claimed in their medical malpractice and wrongful lawsuit that this pain relief medication was more appropriate for a patient about to die than for a person who was expected to be discharged from the hospital. Gargiulo’s family filed suit against the hospital asserting multiple causes of action for medical malpractice. In August, a jury awarded the family $958,258 after it found that the hospital committed medical negligence in its treatment of Gargiulo, and that this negligence resulted in a wrongful death.

I have handled many cases involving overmedication causing serious injuries and even death. These cases require a detailed understanding of medications and dosage levels, which only a medical malpractice lawyer has.

The Maryland Court of Appeals just issued its decision in the Coleman v. Soccer Association of Columbia case regarding whether to abandon the doctrine of contributory negligence (if a plaintiff is the least bit negligent, the plaintiff loses) in favor of the doctrine of comparative negligence (if a plaintiff is negligent, the plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by the percentage of the plaintiff’s negligence). Those on the victims’ side will say that this decision is a refusal to move from an antiquated doctrine to a modern doctrine. Those on the corporate and insurance side will consider this a win.

As set forth in the decision, contributory negligence traces its roots to 1809 in England. Almost all states in the U.S. subsequently adopted the doctrine contributory negligence. But over the years, all but four states and the District of Columbia have adopted comparative negligence. Those states that have abandoned the doctrine of contributory negligence have done so on the basis that is not fair to prevent a plaintiff from recovering when the defendant is negligent and the plaintiff is only 1/10th of 1% negligent.

In the Coleman decision, the Maryland Court of Appeals recognized that it had the authority to change from contributory negligence to comparative negligence since it was that court that originally adopted contributory negligence. However, the court said that for such a change to take place the Maryland legislature should make the change.

There are many hidden and unknown dangers in the very places we expect to heal; for example, hospital beds. Many of these hospital beds have rails, typically made of metal, that run along the side of the sleeping space. These bed rails operate to prevent someone from rolling off accidentally.

Several months ago the Consumer Product Safety Commission released a review of bedrail deaths and injuries of adults. Using data from hospitals, the report cited 155 deaths involving bed rails from January 2003 to September 2012. In that same period, almost 37,000 people were injured in bed rail accidents and treated at hospital emergency rooms. According to this report, the deaths and injuries most commonly occurred when the victim became stuck in the bed rails, mainly with his or her head or neck getting caught. These alarming numbers triggered the CPSC to move forward in addressing bed rail safety.

Last week, the CPSC “merged” two petitions related to bed rail safety. Combined, the two petitions offer the CPSC an array of options: it can decide to do nothing, ban the use of bed rails entirely, or choose any various steps in between. Safety advocates are insistent that no intermediary step will eliminate all harm, suggesting that a ban likely is the best and safest option. The prevalence of these beds and bed rails in residences, nursing homes, and hospitals suggests that it is likely this petition will gain deep collective interest among a number of organizations.

Over the last few days, news reports have surfaced that a gynecologist / obstetrician who worked for Johns Hopkins, Dr. Nikita Levy, was improperly taking photographs and videos of patients.

Apparently, a co-worked reported Dr. Levy to a supervisor at Hopkins on 2/4/13 which resulted in Dr. Levy being fired by Hopkins on 2/8/13 and Hopkins notifying the police.

The police subsequently searched Dr. Levy’s home and found a large amount of “evidence.” Presumably, this means that they found many photos and videos of his patients. After retaining a local lawyer, Dr. Levy committed suicide.

Contact Information