Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice

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.)

INJURIES: Ramon died from sudden respiratory arrest.

Facts:

On Sept. 8, 2006, plaintiffs’ decedent Ramon Varlere, age 7, visited dentist Jeffery Aaron’s office, Dentistry for Children and Adolescents, to have sealants placed on two adult molars by registered dental assistants Andrea Maker and Ren Anders.

Ramon, who was born on May 6, 1999, was diagnosed after his first birthday with spinal muscular atrophy type 1, a progressive disease that causes muscle weakness, lack of motor development and poor muscle tone and severely compromises respiratory function. As Ramon became older, it was clear that he was a belly breather in response to this condition. He was hospitalized six times for emergency respiratory problems by the time he was three years old.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a medical malpractice case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court. 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, UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco General, California Pacific Medical Center, or St. Francis Memorial Hospital.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury case and its proceedings.)

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Defendant: Defendant Matt Melon, M.D. first saw plaintiff Ruth Clementine, age 56, on March 1, 2007. Defendant took a history, performed a physical exam, and reviewed an MRI previously taken of the patient’s cervical spine. The MRI showed a syrinx at C7-T1. Plaintiff complained of pain in her right arm and neck, and, to a lesser extent, her left arm. Defendant prescribed pain medication and physical therapy and planned to obtain a repeat MRI to see if the size of the syrinx had changed.

After conservative management of the syrinx proved unsuccessful, defendant recommended surgery. Defendant’s H&P, dictated on July 6, 2007, indicated that he discussed the risks and benefits of surgery with plaintiff and that the risks included paraplegia, cerebrospinal fluid (“CSF”) leak, CSF infection, and hemorrhage. Plaintiff also signed written consents for the procedure. Plaintiff claimed that, before surgery, defendant stated he was 98 percent certain that after plaintiff healed from the surgery, she would be pain free. Defendant denied making any guarantees of success to plaintiff.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

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 San Jose area, such as Kaiser Permanente, Regional Medical Center, Good Samaritan Hospital, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, or O’Connor Hospital.

(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.)

On April 20, 2007, Georgeson was admitted to a hospital in Sacramento as she had become unresponsive due to a stroke. A CT scan of the brain performed on the same day showed no hemorrhage.

A CT Scan taken April 21 indicated a stroke involving the basal ganglia, internal capsule and right mid-brain. Georgeson was a “do not resuscitate” patient and life support was discontinued that day.

Georgeson’s widower and children sued Levine, alleging that a cardioversion must not be performed unless a patient is adequately anti-coagulated pursuant to American College of Cardiology Guidelines, both before and after cardioversion, and that Levine’s decision to proceed with cardioversion with the patient unprotected, given the inadequate anticoagulation, was below the standard of accepted care. The plaintiffs contended that Georgeson sustained a cardioembolic stroke three days after her cardioversion which resulted in her death.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a medical malpractice case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court. 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, UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco General, California Pacific Medical Center, or St. Francis Memorial Hospital.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Serri also called the expert in plastic and reconstructive surgery, his treating plastic surgeon, who testified that Serri’s was an odd case, as the expert was unaware of any case involving tendon rupture after a trigger finger procedure. The expert testified that the tendons were unusually inflamed and abnormal in appearance from the point of the rupture and along the length of the finger to its tip. The expert was unsure what might have caused the ruptures, but listed trauma, rheumatoid or metabolic disease, including gout or pseudo-gout, and corticosteroids as possible causes. The expert considered whether the tendons were lacerated during surgery, but testified that it was improbable.

Stevens denied Serri’s allegations. The defense orthopedic hand specialist testified that Stevens complied with the applicable standard of care in all aspects. The defense hand expert refuted the opinion that Stevens, a highly experienced surgeon, cut two flexor tendons by noting that Stevens had used a standard and recognized approach to perform a minor procedure in the palm with the hand in extension and in an aluminum hand holder.

The defense hand specialist testified that it would be exceedingly difficult to cut two flexor tendons with scissors in the extremely limited space at the edge of the A2 pulley. He disputed the mechanism of injury postulated by the plaintiff, explaining that such a laceration could not occur by accident, but would require a conscious effort on the surgeon’s part. He testified that no experienced surgeon would blindly operate in a location of the hand which was not indicated and could not be visualized.

Defense counsel contended that there was no evidence that Stevens or his staff had advised Serri on April 28 that swelling and redness were normal and that he did not have to worry about it or come in to be seen. Counsel contended that swelling and redness after surgery are red flags for potential infection and that, had Serri indicated such symptoms, he would have been advised to see the doctor immediately.

Stevens testified that, had Serri followed through with the reconstructive surgery originally scheduled for June 2, 2006, he would have had a good chance of a successful recovery and functional use of his finger.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

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 San Jose area, such as Kaiser Permanente, Regional Medical Center, Good Samaritan Hospital, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, or O’Connor Hospital.

(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.)

INJURIES: Georgeson died from a stroke. Her husband and children sought recovery of non-economic damages of between $400,000 and $500,000. The plaintiffs sought recovery of damages for future loss of parental guidance, future loss of companionship, future loss of financial support and funeral expenses.

Facts:
In December 2002, plaintiffs’ decedent Pamela Georgeson, 74, began cardiology care with Dr. Neil Levine. Georgeson underwent a coronary angiography with stent placement, coronary artery bypass graft surgery and pacemaker placement.

Georgeson had multiple medical risk factors including hypertension, hypercolesteremia, diabetes and peripheral vascular disease. She also had a stroke of the posterior cerebral artery distribution in December 2000.

After attending regular visits with Levine in 2003 and 2004, Georgeson didn’t attend office visits in 2005. In 2006, she indicated that she was no longer willing to take statins, aspirin or undergo treadmill examinations. She chose to take medications prescribed by her primary care physician, including L-Arginine for her high blood pressure and hypercholesteremia, and Byetta for diabetes.

In November 2006, Georgeson developed atrial fibrillation. She refused to take an anti-coagulant, Coumadin, to protect her against risk for atrial fibrillationstroke due to a history of nosebleeds.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog is provided as an example of a Kaiser medical malpractice lawsuit to aid potential clients in how a lawsuit is examined and conduced. 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 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.)

INJURIES: Levine claimed that as a result of Hanson’s negligence, she sustained nerve damage from the kinking and a small sensory nerve was cut, both of which required a second surgery. The second surgery reduced her pain, but she has a diminished grip. She claimed that her injuries, including grip loss, were permanent and non-operable.

Facts:

On March 28, 2008, plaintiff Kimberly Levine, 31, a human resources supervisor, underwent an ulnar nerve transposition performed by Dr. Allan Hanson. Levine had a long history of shoulder and arm weakness. She had a work up completed through doctors and then returned to Hanson for the surgical consultation. Hanson had given Levine cortisone injections, which did relieve symptoms, and he recommended surgery on her shoulder and right, dominant elbow.

After the ulnar nerve transposition, Levine immediately became more symptomatic. She had outpatient therapy with no relief. She then switched health insurance and the subsequent orthopedist noted immediately that the incision scar was suspect for full release and advised reoperation, which was performed.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a medical malpractice case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court. 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, UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco General, California Pacific Medical Center, or St. Francis Memorial Hospital.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Although the second stage of reconstructive surgery was scheduled, Serri elected to forego its completion and had the expert amputate the right middle finger at the level of the proximal interphalangeal joint, located at the middle of his finger on Jan. 11, 2007. The expert testified that Serri’s decision was motivated by a desire to return to work sooner, that Serri felt rehabilitation would take too long and was not guaranteed. Serri testified that he decided on amputation because he felt the two-stage procedure was experimental and that the expert had given him a poor prognosis even if he completed reconstructive surgery.

Serri thereafter returned to work, but developed left shoulder pain that he claimed was the consequence of overuse caused by compensating for the amputated finger, aggravating underlying degenerative shoulder disease. He underwent shoulder surgery on Sept. 8, 2008, performed by his expert in orthopedic surgery, who opined that the predominant problem accounting for the symptoms was joint arthritis. The expert also found calcium pyrophosphate disease, or pseudo-gout, which he thought could have been a contributing factor accounting for the symptoms. Serri did not return to his job and claimed that he was unable to do similar duties.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

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 San Jose area, such as Kaiser Permanente, Regional Medical Center, Good Samaritan Hospital, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, or O’Connor Hospital.

(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.)

INJURIES: Walters claimed that due to the aneurysm rupture, she underwent several surgical procedures and later developed right-sided weakness secondary to a frontal lobe stroke. She also claimed she suffered two heart attacks, and had continual headaches, cognitive difficulties, trouble sleeping, depression and anxiety.

Facts:

On Jan. 5, 2007, plaintiff Jan Walters, 47, unemployed, presented to Sacramento Hospital. Walters allegedly complained of a painful left-sided headache. A nurse conducted a medical screening and consulted with an on-duty physician, who prescribed pain medication and told Walters to go to the Sacramento emergency room. Walters did not go to the ER. On Feb 24, she suffered a cerebral aneurysm rupture, lost consciousness while driving and allegedly collided with a tree. She was then taken to ABC Medical Center where she underwent successful procedures to address the injury.

Walters sued Sacramento Hospital, alleging medical malpractice. She claimed that they had violated the standard of care and that the county had violated provisions of Federally Qualified Health Centers and the Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, well as internal policies. She claimed that she had presented with a right-sided (not left) headache that required further evaluation. She claimed that had she been given a more thorough evaluation, she might have been transported by ambulance, where diagnostic tests might have revealed the aneurysm.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog is provided as an example of a Kaiser medical malpractice lawsuit to aid potential clients in how a lawsuit is examined and conduced. 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 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.)

On November 10, 2009, in prescribing the Oxycodone slow release “twice daily” as needed for pain, Dr. Devlin violated the standard of care established by the Black Box Warning. In the alternative, she violated the Family Practice standard of care in failing to give her patient unambiguous instructions as to the correct way to take the Oxycodone. The violations of the standard of care were a substantial factor in causing decedent’ death.

The defense contended that Dr. Devlin did not violate the standard of care for Family Practitioners in continuing to prescribe high levels of narcotic pain medication for decedent when she could not attend the Kaiser Management Program. There is no standard of care for prescribing opioid medications for chronic pain. The Family Practitioner is obligated to continue to prescribe narcotics to control the patient’s pain and is not obligated to taper the patient from narcotics. The patient can be prescribed unlimited amounts as tolerated.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

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.)

INJURIES: Anthem alleged the need for emergency corrective surgery and emotional distress. She was seeking damages for past pain and suffering.

Facts:

On June 1, 2006, plaintiff Ruth Anthem, 24, a certified nursing assistant, was admitted to Sutter Memorial Hospital for a scheduled Caesarean section by her primary OB-GYN. The surgery went forward, and Anthem’s son was born.

On June 2, Anthem’s regular OB-GYN followed her and then OB-GYN Jeffery Worth assumed her care while on-call over the weekend. On June 3, Worth evaluated Anthem in the morning, noting that she was afebrile and doing well. He examined the abdominal incision from the C-section and did not note any problems. Worth made orders for removal of the skin clips to be replaced by steri-strips in anticipation of discharge home.

The nursing staff contacted Worth later that afternoon to confirm his orders and advise of a small amount of serosanguineous drainage from the incision, though the clips remained intact and wound edges well-approximated. Worth reiterated that it was okay to proceed with the clip removal and placement of steri-strips.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›