Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Infant Born With Severe Cerebral Palsy Claims Hospital Negligence, Part 1 of 2

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a birth injury 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.

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

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: On August 21, 2007, plaintiff’s mother, age 27, entered defendant hospital for delivery of her first child. She had full prenatal care with no problems or complications and was at 36 weeks gestation. On the morning of admission she experienced some vaginal bleeding and pain and went to the Labor & Delivery unit where she was checked by an obstetrician, who did not find any bleeding but elected to admit her for further observation. Over the next several hours there was no further evidence of bleeding and no evidence of any problems on the fetal monitor tracing.

At 5:00 p.m., the on-call OB examined the mother and confirmed that she was 4 cm dilated and that the FMS was reactive. An IUPC was placed and was functioning. The OB left the room around 5:12 p.m. to go to the nurses’ station on the L&D unit, leaving the OB nurse (an employee of defendant nursing agency) with the patient. The OB nurse then left the room and walked by the nurses’ station, stating that she was going to the restroom. No one at the nurses’ station was able to recall that statement. The nurse later recorded that she returned to the room at 5:20 p.m. and observed scattered fetal heart tracing. She stopped Pitocin and attempted to obtain a better tracing. The nurse later noted that at 5:26 p.m., the charge nurse came into the room and asked if she needed help.

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

Rear-End Car Collision Causes Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a brain injury lawsuit could develop and resolve. Reviewing this summary should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

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

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Over four years ago, plaintiff Neil Harris, an amateur boxer and mixed-martial arts fighter and trainer, was rear-ended by a delivery truck driver, defendant James Vermon. At the scene of the collision, plaintiff said he was fine; there was no report done by the paramedics. Days later, he had dizziness and word-finding difficulty. He did not see a doctor. Weeks later, he was diagnosed as having a minor concussion. All brain scans were read and reported as normal by both the treating doctors and defense experts. There was no positive imaging to make a brain injury case on. The Glasgow Coma Scale was normal, and there was no loss of consciousness at the scene.

After the late diagnosis of concussion, plaintiff’s symptoms worsened, and, after six months, he developed a tic disorder, uncontrollable movements of his right arm and other parts of his body.

The defense experts all called him a faker and fraud because all the MRI scans were clean. Even treating doctors and plaintiff’s experts diagnosed him as having a conversion disorder. The defense consistently offered zero for the four years this case was ongoing. Medical research by the team of experts found reports that tic disorders, while rare, can occur months after a mild traumatic brain injury.

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

Kaiser Patient Dies From Negligent Prescription of Pain Medicine, Part 1 of 3

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

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.)

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiffs Lyle Gaff, Arthur Gaff, Darlene Gaff, and Avery Gaff alleged that decedent Irene Bent, a 34-year-old wife and mother of three teenage children, ages 18, 17, and 15, died as a result of Oxycodone and opioid toxicity. Decedent was a long-time Kaiser member. In 2003, she injured her back at work and had continued complaints of chronic low back pain thereafter. She was treated only at Kaiser. In 2008, defendant Martha Devlin, M.D. became her primary physician. Defendant Devlin prescribed numerous opioid medications for decedent’s back pain over the course of the next one and a half years. There were only minor subjective findings of back pathology (MRI showed small disc protrusion and tenderness on exam).

On several occasions, Dr. Devlin appropriately referred decedent to the Kaiser Pain Management Clinic. However, initially, since decedent was a full-time college student and mother, she could not attend. Later, because the clinic was far from her home, she could not attend. Instead of attempting to taper decedent from the high doses of opioids, Dr. Devlin continued to increase the dosage. At times, decedent e-mailed Dr. Devlin, asking if there was anything other than all the pills that could help her. As of November 10, 2009, decedent was taking Oxycodone/Oxycontin in 30 mg slow release, 2 tablets, twice daily (120 mg daily) for controlled continuous pain relief and Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen, 10 mg, 1 tablet every 4 hours (60 mg daily) for breakthrough pain. Both are opioids with a known risk for respiratory suppression and heart rate slowing.

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

Young Adult Sues Sacramento Hospital After Nurses Improperly Place Feeding Tube

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

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: Garson ultimately had an open laparotomy to wash out the infection. He also had to remain in the hospital an additional six weeks. He claimed that he did experience pain and suffering despite being in a comatose state and having no memory of the event.

Facts:

On Aug. 22, 2004, plaintiff Rod Garson, 18, a student, was taken to UC Davis Medical Center while in a coma, following a catastrophic brain injury resulting from a car crash. He was either in a persistent vegatative state or a minimally conscious state and hooked up to a gastrostomy feeding tube.

On Oct. 10, Garson was scheduled to be discharged home, although still comatose. As part of the discharge plans, the gastrostomy tube was replaced, and a new tube was installed. However, the new tube was improperly positioned outside of his stomach. Garson was then fed through the malpositioned tube on five separate occasions over the next 12 hours and the feedings went directly into the abdominal cavity, causing him to become septic.

Garson sued the hospital through the Regents of the University of California, alleging medical malpractice. He claimed that the defendant’s caregivers were negligent in malpositioning the tube; in failing to confirm its proper position before administering feedings; and in feeding him through a wrongly placed tube.

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

San Francisco Medical Malpractice Case Claimed By Inmate Who Suffered Complete Loss of Bladder After Operation

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

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.)

INJURIES: Harris contended that due to the delay in placing the suprapubic catheter, he suffered permanent loss of urinary function.

Facts:

In September 2008, plaintiff Pete Harris, 48, an inmate at Salinas Valley State Prison in California, sued the California Department of Corrections and Dr. Casey Larth, the prison health care manager, alleging that Larth had exhibited indifference to his serious medical need over a period from June 2004 to December 2007, in violation of his Eight Amendment rights. Harris also alleged retaliation.

Harris claimed that Larth had deliberately delayed in the diagnosis of a neurogenic bladder dysfunction condition, as well as replacement of an indwelling Foley catheter, emplacement of a suprapubic catheter and allowing Harris to follow up with contract urologists.

Harris further alleged that in retaliation for his civil complaint, Larth ordered prison official to search his cell and strip him of authorized medical supplies. Additionally, Harris claimed Larth denied his request to be taken to an emergency room after a suprapubic tub became dislodged from his abdomen.

Harris also sued Dr. Gary Remmy, an emergency room doctor at SVSP who treated Harris when his suprapubic catheter became dislodged, and nurse Derek Jason, who treated Harris at various times.

The plaintiff’s emergency medicine expert opined that the prison medical staff should have reacted quicker to Harris’s complaints of urinary tract problems and that the delay especially caused complete loss of use of his bladder.

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

Wife and Child Sue After Husband Dies From Pain Medication Overdoes Prescribed After Car Accident

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury 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.

(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: Adam and Gillian both complained of neck and back pain after the accident, and went to an urgent care center later that day. Both proceeded with conservative care with physical therapists and chiropractors.

Facts:

On Jan. 8, 2002, plaintiffs’ decedent Adam Oliver, 41, a self-employed marketer of promotional materials, was driving a car with his daughter, plaintiff Gillian Oliver, riding as a passenger. They were rear-ended by a California Department of Transportation pickup truck on Shaw Avenue, near its intersection with West Avenue in Fresno.

Adam eventually underwent a lumbar discectomy fusion to remedy his injuries, and then accidentally died from an overdose of painkillers.

Adam’s widow Janice, individually and as successor-in-interest to Adam and Gillian, sued Caltrans, claiming that the agency was entirely at fault for the accident. They also claimed that Adam had been slowing for traffic when he was hit.

The plaintiffs further claimed that, since Adam would not have been taking pain medication if he had not been in the accident, Caltrans was responsible for his accidental death.

Caltrans admitted liability for the car accident, but disputed liability for Adam’s death.

Adam’s lower back pain did not resolve, but kept getting worse. He sought treatment from various specialists, and then underwent a three-level lumbar discectomy and fusion. During the fusion, there was a complication that caused nerve damage. The nerve damage caused Adam significant chronic post-operative pain in his back and legs, for which he was prescribed pain medications.

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

Woman Claims Sacramento Car Accident Causes Life-Changing Injury

June 4, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

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

INJURIES: Torrance sought care the following day. She claimed a life-changing injury to her lower back that developed into discitis at L5-S1. She underwent orthopedic medical treatment and chiropractic care and got MRIs and epidurals. She claimed in excess of $21,000 in medical specials.

Facts:

On March 5, 2004, plaintiff Martha Torrance, 30s, a sales representative, was driving a sedan southbound on Interstate 5 in Sacramento. Fred Rudolph was driving a utility truck in the same direction on the same roadway in the scope of his employment with California XYZ.

Torrance slowed down for traffic congestion, and was rear-ended by Rudolph.

Claiming physical damages, Torrance sued Rudolph, California XYZ and company president Jim Garron for motor vehicle negligence.

The defense admitted liability.

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

Wrongful Death Lawsuit Takes To Trial After Elderly Patient Dies, Part 5 of 5

June 2, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury 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.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this big rig accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Defendant: Death.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Defendant: Plaintiffs did not claim any economic damages. Plaintiffs’ attorney argued for approximately $1.7 million for loss of comfort, society, companionship, etc.

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Defendant: Plaintiffs demanded $1 million from all defendants. Defendants offered, pursuant to CCP § 998, a waiver of costs in exchange for a dismissal.

COMMENTS

According to Defendant: Judge granted a nonsuit to all defendants on the “Elder Abuse” cause of action after plaintiffs rested. However, he did allow plaintiffs to amend their complaint to conform to proof to allege “medical battery” against Dr. Haim only. However, he also ruled that he would not allow an allegation of entitlement to punitive damages. The patient’s grandson, son of plaintiff Sasha Jimerson, was his caregiver. He was being paid by “In Home Social Services” for the care and often would leave decedent for days on “paydays.” There had been multiple visits to the home by Adult Protective Services (“APS”), but no charges were brought. Dr. Reason became aware (after the patient’s admission to ABC) of the investigation and was interviewed by detectives before the patient died. The patient’s entire family, including Sasha Jimerson, was implicated. After the patient died, APS declared the death a coroner’s case and advised Dr. Reason not to sign a death certificate or otherwise indicate a cause of death in the hospital chart. After autopsy, the coroner declared the death a “homicide” and opined that, although the patient died from complications of hip surgery, that would not have occurred had he not been abused by his caregiver.

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

Wrongful Death Claim Against Hospital After Elderly Patient Dies, Part 4 of 5

May 25, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury 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.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this big rig accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Defendant Haim adamantly denied he ever promised the patient he would walk again. Instead, he documented that the surgery was for relief of pain, which was likely going to continue without repair of the hip. On the afternoon of February 17, 2007, he noted the hematologist had ordered the patient to have nothing by mouth after midnight and that his blood should be typed and cross-matched for two units of blood for typical replacement after surgery. He interpreted these orders as “clearance” for the surgery. He hoped to improve the patient’s quality of life by eliminating pain during movement. He operates very frequently on Sundays on elective cases.

The nurse obtaining the written consent, who was training at the time, said she would have been physically accompanied by her charge nurse when she obtained the patient’s written consent, and neither would have obtained it if they had any doubt of the patient’s competency. The family is noted to be in the patient’s room that afternoon, and she would have documented any objection to the surgery.

Both doctors denied the patient was bleeding to death. There was no significant surgical wound bleeding noted, and his anemia was corrected by transfusions. Other areas, such as the GI-tract, were evaluated for bleeding, and nothing significant was found.

With regard to negligence, defendants’ expert testified that Dr. Reason complied with the standard of care in all respects. The “possible dementia” was in the differential diagnosis at admission but was transient and likely due to dehydration, infection, and hypoxia. With regard to causation, he testified that the patient died of complications of multi-organ failure but not due to bleeding. Instead, his kidneys began failing (prior to surgery) after a consultant ordered a CT of the neck with contrast to rule out an airway obstruction.

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

Elderly Patient Dies In Hospital After Bleeding To Death Post-Surgery, Part 3 of 5

May 18, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of an injury 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.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this big rig accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs Sasha Jimerson and Sam Watson Jr. alleged that the patient clearly was demented and could not legally consent to the surgery. The surgery was unnecessary in an 89 year old with multiple medical problems and exposed him to a high risk of complication. The consent obtained on February 17, 2007 was invalid because of dementia. All of the defendants should have made the diagnosis of dementia or should have had a neurologist consult on the patient prior to surgery.

Plaintiffs also alleged that the patient was never “cleared” for surgery by Dr. Reason and, therefore, Dr. Haim acted prematurely. After surgery, the patient essentially bled to death, most likely from undocumented and persistent bleeding from the surgical incision, and defendants failed to control the bleeding, which led to underperfusion of the patient’s vital organs, ultimately causing his death.

Plaintiffs’ expert had no criticism of the surgery itself. Instead, he believed the consent was invalid due to the patient’s mental condition. He was critical of Dr. Haim for not correcting the post-operative hemorrhaging.

Plaintiffs’ expert criticized everyone for obtaining consent from a person clearly incompetent to give consent. The daughter’s concerns were well taken, and, at a minimum, Dr. Reason and Dr. Haim should have consulted with hospital administration and a neurologist for assistance. Although he acknowledged that Dr. Reason did not clear the patient for surgery, which he commended, he did criticize his “quarterbacking” of the post-operative care with regard to the bleeding, which he should have diagnosed and corrected. Finally, he criticized Dr. Reason for “covering up” for Dr. Haim in his dictated death summary, as it says that there was an intensive discussion with the family before the surgery went forward, which clearly was not true.

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