Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)
Dr. Stein also opined in his deposition that the Defendants violated its own policies and procedures as set fort in its Patients’ Rights document.
Dr. Majore will opine that the defendants fell below the standard of care when they failed to take adequate steps to determine the extent of neurological involvement causing Mr. Brown’s symptoms following the surgery of August 20, 2008.
Dr. Majore will be opining that the defendants fell below the standard of care when they failed to properly document the patient’s file with the e-mails discussing the patients’ care.
Dr. Majore will be opining that the attending physicians employed by the defendants fell below the standard of care when they failed to properly sign the medical records.
DEFENDANTS FELL BELOW THE STANDARD CARE WHEN THEY FAILED TO TIMELY DIAGNOSE AND TREAT PLAINTIFF’S INFECTED FLUID COLLECTION/20 ABSCESS AUGUST 31, 2008 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 9, 2008
Dr. Stein’s Declaration (Exhibit “A”) further set’s forth his opinion that the Defendants fell below the standard of care after he was discharged from the hospital on August 27, 2008 as follows:
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
7. Failure to diagnose and treat the wound infection/epidural abscess on Mr. Brown’s emergency room visit postoperatively on August 31, 2008, based partially on failure to listen to the patient’s complaints and take them seriously.
8. Failure to perform an MRI as requested by Dr. Davis when in the emergency room.
9. Failure to communicate with Dr. Davis who tried heroically to contact other doctors in the system over and above what would be expected and got no response.
10. Ignoring the written note Dr. Davis sent with the patient to the emergency room requested blood work and MRI prior to the neurosurgical consultation.
11. Ignoring the fact that the patient is diabetic and at greater risk for infection.
Further, Dr .Stein opined in his deposition that the defendants should have performed an MRI on August 31, 2008, and even if the MRI did not indicate a need for surgery at that point, defendants should kept Mr. Brown under observation and performed repeat MRIs and other tests as necessary to ensure that the infection did not cause injury. (See Part 3 of 3.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.