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.)
In sum, the facts presented at trial, which were not rebutted by any substantial evidence, showed that Plaintiff entered the hospital with an intact foot in which all the bones and joints, except for the navicular, were free of fractures and dislocations. The admitting x-ray established this. After a week of hospitalization under the exclusive care of Defendants, Plaintiff’s foot was destroyed with many fractures and joint dislocations. Trial testimony confirmed that any attempt to surgically repair Plaintiff’s foot carries a high risk of amputation.
Based on the evidence, Plaintiff, an elderly woman who must care for herself, personally suffered great physical and mental injuries, and financial loss due to those injuries. Future medical expenses, surgeries, and home care will be required to correct Plaintiff’s medical condition. As the evidence showed at trial, defendant, the Regents, is responsible for Plaintiff’s catastrophic injuries, and past and future physical and mental pain and suffering. For these reasons, the Court should grant Plaintiff a new trial based on the fact that there is insufficient evidence to support the verdict of the jury.
Conclusion
Based on the evidence presented at trial, each of the Plaintiff’s claims against defendant Regents was proven by a preponderance of the evidence. No other reasonable conclusion can be legally deductible from the evidence.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
In particular, Plaintiff’s claims of medical professional negligence against the Regents based upon the medical negligence of its employees, Dr. White and Dr. Brown, were proven without contradiction, as found by the jury. But for said negligence, Plaintiff would not have suffered the injuries she sustained. Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court rule that as set forth in the minutes of the Court, there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict and to grant Plaintiff Johnson’s Motion for New Trial.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.