| by

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this elder abuse/medical malpractice case and its proceedings.)

The Pressure Sore

On August 17, 2006, the plaintiff was evaluated by Kim White R.N., the MC wound care nurse. Ms. White noted that plaintiff developed a skin breakdown at the area of her coccyx. It was measured as 4 x 3 cms, and the skin was fragile and discolored. Ms. White thought the wound was due to shearing; i.e., from friction while being moved.

Over the next week, the nursing staff continued to turn plaintiff every two hours, and followed the care ordered by the physician (as recommended by Ms. White). However, because of her poor underlying condition, and multiple co-morbidities, the plaintiff’s wound became a pressure sore. By August 23, 2006, the wound had progressed to a Stage III, and by this point was 8 cm. x 10 cm. large.

While plaintiff was not going to go to acute rehabilitation, the hope was that she could be discharged to a skilled nursing facility. However, for her to be able to do so she needed to be able to tolerate out-patient dialysis. For her to be able to do this she needed to be able to sit for three hours at a time. This was something she was never able to do.

In terms of plaintiff’s neurologic status, it remained guarded. On September 27, 2006, she had a swallowing evaluation. She was found to be at high risk for aspiration, and it was recommended that she not be given anything orally.

Continue Reading ›

| by

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

PLAINTIFF’S TRIAL BRIEF
GENERAL STATEMENT OF CASE

This is an auto versus auto accident case occurring on October 10, 2006 at approximately 7:00 p.m. Plaintiff Sandy Smith was traveling northbound on University Avenue crossing the intersection with North Street when defendant Dan Brown, who had been traveling southbound on University Avenue, was making a left turn onto eastbound North Street. The signal at the intersection was green for northbound travel, but Mr. Brown made his turn when it was unsafe to do so. There were SUV vehicles in the no. 1 lane waiting to turn left onto westbound North Street from northbound University which blocked both Mr. Brown’s view of Ms. Smith and Ms. Smith’s view of Mr. Brown. However, Ms. Smith clearly had the right of way as she was heading straight through the intersection on a green light and Mr. Brown clearly had the duty to not make his turn until it was safe to do so.

Plaintiff thus submits that there is no dispute about liability for this accident.

Ms. Smith saw Mr. Brown when he was approximately 7 to 10 feet away. There was no time to avoid the accident at that point. She struck Mr. Brown and, as a result, her car turned 90 degrees to the right. Ms. Smith was knocked unconscious for about 30 to 90 seconds as a result of the accident.

Continue Reading ›

| by

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death/elder abuse case and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges wrongful death, failure to report and civil conspiracy, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and elder abuse, against the various defendants. Defendant Dr. Gary Greene was the physician who oversaw the treatment of Mr. Ryan in the emergency room.

Notably, the complaint is completely devoid of any allegations of negligence against any staff or employee of Universal Medical Center with respect to the treatment Mr. Ryan received in the emergency department. Plaintiffs allege, rather, that Dr. Greene was negligent in treating Mr. Ryan, and they further allege that Dr. Greene was either an agent or an employee of Universal Medical Center.

The core grievance throughout plaintiffs’ complaint is their claim that Dr. Greene formed an intent to steal Mr. Ryan watch while in the emergency room, and thus he did not perform all necessary measures to resuscitate Mr. Ryan. Plaintiffs allege that Universal Medical Center is liable for Dr. Greene’s allegedly criminal actions. There is evidence in this case that Dr. Greene may have stolen the watch. The staff at Universal Medical Center, however, recovered the watch, which was returned to the family that night. There has been a grand jury indictment against Dr. Greene for the theft of the watch. The alleged theft, whether it occurred or not, however, is not germane to the issues herein. Whether or not the watch was stolen by Dr. Greene, however, is irrelevant to the issues presented in this motion for summary adjudication against the wrongful death cause of action.

Continue Reading ›

| by

The following blog entry is written from a defendant’s position as trial approaches. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death/medical malpractice case and its proceedings.)

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.

INTRODUCTION

This medical malpractice action against Defendant Stuart White, M.D. arises out of his care and treatment of minor plaintiff Amy Brown in and around May 25, 1999, at co-defendant XYZ Hospital. On August 16, 2000, plaintiffs filed their Complaint, and on December 21, 2000, they filed their First Amended Complaint. On November 14, 2002, plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint was amended adding Dr. White as a Doe defendant. On December 5, 2002, Dr. White was served with a Summons on the Amended First Amended Complaint.

On May 25, 1999, Dr. White was called to XYZ Hospital for emergency neonatal care of plaintiff Amy Brown. Neither plaintiff Amy Brown, nor her mother, plaintiff Tina Brown, were the patient of Dr. White, nor had he ever treated either of them before. Further, Dr. White only treated plaintiff Amy Brown at XYZ Hospital on May 25, 1999. In their Complaint, plaintiffs essentially allege that Dr. White failed to timely diagnose and treat plaintiff Amy Brown’s respiratory difficulties, causing her to suffer further hypoxic brain injury.

Continue Reading ›

| by

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

On February 9, 2006, plaintiff returned to Dr. Brown with pain in his right arm and hand along with neck pain associated with the accident. Dr. Brown provided ultrasound treatment and myofascial release.

On February 14, 2006, plaintiff returned to Dr. Brown with pain in his neck which radiated to his right arm and hand. Dr. Brown referred plaintiff for an MRI at Advanced MRI of Sacramento.

On February 21, 2006, plaintiff had an MRI of his cervical spine at Sacramento Imaging Center which was read by Kenneth Dorham, M.D., who’s impression was:

1. Mild to moderate anterior extraduarl impressions at the C4-5 and C5-6 levels as described. At the C4-5 level this is due to a small central disc protrusion, and at the C5-6 level, this appears to be due to a moderate broad based disc osteophyte.

2. Right sided neural foraminal narrowing at the C5-6 level due to bony hypertrophic changes.

3. The cord has a generally flattened appearance throughout the cervical spine and the AP diameter of the canal even where the disc appear normal is less than 9mm. This is likely developmental in nature.

On March 2, 2006, plaintiff returned to Dr. Brown with neck pain radiating into his right arm. Chiropractic adjustments were administered.

On March 16, 2006 plaintiff returned to Dr. Brown with ongoing pain in his neck.

Plaintiff treated with Dr. Brown from February 8, 2006 to March 16, 2006 for a total of 5 visits.

Continue Reading ›

| by

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

UNIVERSAL HOSPITAL’S TRIAL BRIEF REGARDING PRINCIPLES OF WRONGFUL BIRTH, OSTENSIBLE AGENCY, AND APPORTIONMENT OF FAULT
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff Oliver Smith, a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, Mike Smith, (“plaintiff Oliver”) and plaintiff Patty Smith (“Mrs. Smith”) seek damages for injuries allegedly resulting from the provision of medical care and treatment to Mrs. Smith during her pregnancy with her son. Specifically, plaintiff’s allege the defendants were negligent in the pre-natal care of Mrs. Smith and, as a consequence, the baby was born with Down Syndrome.

The operative complaint states two causes of action by plaintiff Oliver and against Universal Hospital: (1) Professional negligence; and (2) Wrongful birth. Plaintiff Oliver alleges that Mrs. Smith hired the defendants to diagnose and treat her pregnancy and to provide pre-natal care, testing and advice. According to the allegations, the defendants were so negligent in the provision of care to Mrs. Smith that: (1) Mrs. Smith was not given the opportunity for MS-AFP testing; (2) Mrs. Smith was not offered the option of terminating the pregnancy; and (3) Plaintiff Oliver was born a Down Syndrome baby. According to the allegations of the complaint, but for the negligence of defendants, plaintiff Oliver would not have been born at all.

Continue Reading ›

| by

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this elder abuse/medical malpractice case and its proceedings.)

INTRODUCTION

This is an action for professional negligence, and ostensibly, for elder abuse, with a claim for punitive damages. The plaintiff, Allison Brown, has brought this action through her daughter and guardian ad litem, Nancy Smith. The defendants are Medical Center, Inc. (hereinafter “MC”) and Universal Health. This action arises from care and treatment provided to Ms. Brown at MC, where Ms. Brown is still a patient.

This case involves two allegations: negligent care resulting in the development of a pressure sore, and an alleged failure to monitor on October 10, 2006, leading to a respiratory arrest.

FACTS

On July 25, 2006, plaintiff Allison Brown was brought by ambulance to the ER at the Campus of MC. She had been undergoing dialysis when her family noticed that she was unable to speak, and it was noted that she had right-sided deficits. She arrived at 1645 that day, and at 1700 was being evaluated by the ER physician. She was alert and intermittently verbal, and had an abnormal neurologic examination, including an inability to move her right arm or either leg. A stat CT was ordered. It revealed the presence of an old right frontal lobe infarct (i.e. an old stroke). She was also determined to have had a new stroke. The plan was to admit her to the hospital and to provide supportive care and further evaluate her condition.

On July 26, 2006 the initial nursing assessment was done of the plaintiff. At the time of her admission she was noted to have redness on her right buttock. She was also non-verbal by this point, and had a left facial droop. She was also seen by neurologist Joan Green M.D. on July 26. Dr. Green noted the plaintiff’s ability to speak had deteriorated since the day before, and when she saw plaintiff she was nonresponsive, and did not follow commands. She suspected a left hemisphere stroke, and recommend a MRI and carotid ultrasound.

Continue Reading ›

| by

The following blog entry is written from a defendant’s position as trial approaches. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

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

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.

This Motion For Summary Judgment will be made upon the grounds that there are no triable issues of material fact in this action in that the medical care and treatment rendered by defendant Stuart White, M.D. to minor plaintiff Amy Brown complied, at all times, with the applicable standard of care. Moreover, the care and treatment provided by defendant in no way caused or contributed to plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages.

In addition, defendant provided emergent treatment to plaintiff Amy Brown, at the scene of the emergency at the defendant hospital. As such, defendant cannot be liable for plaintiffs’ damages pursuant to California’s Good Samaritan Law, California Business & Professions Code § 2395 and § 2396.

Continue Reading ›

| by

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

Mandatory Settlement Conference Statement of Defendant Dina White
STATEMENT OF FACTS

This case arises out of a red light/green light dispute that occurred at the intersection of University Avenue and Green Street in Sacramento, CA, on January 22, 2006. Defendant, Dina White, was traveling in a 2002 Audi Quattro and came to a stop at University Avenue to make a left hand turn. When the left hand turn signal changed to green (an arrow), defendant proceeded to turn left. Plaintiff, Michael Owen, was traveling in a 1998 BMW 528i, eastbound on University Avenue and drove through the intersection on a red light. The passenger side fender and hood of defendant’s Audi came into contact with driver’s side front fender of plaintiff’s BMW.

Besides these two drivers, there are no witnesses to this accident. There is no police report in connection with this case. Both vehicles were declared a total loss as a result of this accident.

LIABILITY

Plaintiff is at fault for causing this accident by illegally running a red light.

INJURIES AND TREATMENT
On February 8, 2006, plaintiff presented to Kate Brown, D.C. to establish care. According to Dr. Brown’s initial exam report, plaintiff stated that he was involved in the accident when a Audi ran a red light and hit his automobile.

Continue Reading ›

| by

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death/elder abuse case and its proceedings.)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendant TMC, Inc.’s, dba Universal Medical Center’s Motion for Summary Adjudication
INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

This motion for summary adjudication is brought on behalf of defendant TMC, Inc., dba Universal Medical Center (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Universal”) against plaintiffs’ first cause of action for wrongful death. Plaintiffs Sean Ryan, Jr. and Nancy Smith (hereinafter collectively referred to as “plaintiffs”) have alleged several additional causes of action against defendants, all of which they claim arose out of the death of their father, Sean Ryan, Sr. (hereinafter “Mr. Ryan”) on June 1, 2008.

Background Facts and Issues Presented

Mr. Ryan was a 61-year-old man weighing over 400 pounds. A neighbor called 911 after Mr. Ryan, had collapsed and was non-responsive for about 15 minutes. Emergency personnel arrived at approximately 2251 and found Mr. Ryan in full arrest with fixed and dilated pupils and cold to the touch. Mr. Ryan was intubated, and the paramedics attempted resuscitation for about 31 minutes, both at his home and en-route to the emergency room. During this time, Mr. Ryan remained non-responsive and had no pulse. The paramedics attempted to insert an intravenous line on-scene, but they were unable to gain access to a vein. Mr. Ryan was brought into the emergency room at Universal Medical Center at approximately 2322, still unresponsive.

Continue Reading ›