Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

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: Rutters claimed that the surgical resident performed the banding procedure negligently, causing him excruciating pain. During a hemorrhoidectomy April 13, Rutters was placed in lithotomy position, which was lying on his back with his legs elevated in candy cane stirrups. Following the surgery, he claimed that he immediately felt pain in his left leg, hip and buttock. He was ultimately diagnosed with a herniated disc at L5-S1.

Facts:

On April 5, 2006, plaintiff Herman Rutters, 35, a master diesel mechanic, underwent a hemorrhoidbanding procedure at Kaiser Permanente in San Diego. The procedure was performed by a third-year surgery resident from the University of California-San Diego.

Rutters underwent a surgical hemorrhoidectomy April 13. During the hemorrhoidectomy, he was placed in lithotomy position, which was lying on his back with his legs elevated in candy cane stirrups. Following the surgery, Rutters claimed that he immediately felt pain in his left leg, hip and buttock. He was ultimately diagnosed with a herniated disc at L5-S1.

Rutters sued Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Southern California Permanente Medical Group. He alleged that he received negligent treatment.

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: 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 ›