Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Man Suffers From Severe Brain Injury After Car Runs Stop Sign, Part 2 of 2

May 15, 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.)

On August 3, 2009, plaintiff reported feeling numbness in his left leg. An examination found palpable tenderness in the right groin over the ramus and in the posterior right sacral region. On August 6, 2009, he was examined by another doctor and he reported continued morning headaches. X-rays of his right ribs taken on August 10, 2009 revealed a non-displaced fracture of the anterior segment of the eighth rib. By September 3, 2009, plaintiff’s headaches were becoming more severe, with confusion, altered mental status, blurred vision, lower extremity tremors, and numbness. A CT scan revealed a 2.5 cm hematoma on the left cerebral hemisphere and midline shift. He was admitted to a hospital, and burr holes were done for drainage. The following day, a CT scan found more hemorrhage and a craniotomy was performed. He was discharged on September 14, 2009. Plaintiff was subsequently diagnosed with disc bulges at L3-L4 and L4-L5, severe spinal stenosis at L4-L5, and L5-S1 facet hypertrophy. He underwent physical therapy from April 14, 2010 until May 25, 2010, and he underwent an epidural injection on January 14, 2011. He underwent a surgery at L4-L5. Plaintiff claimed that he had cognitive deficits and experiences memory loss, confusion, and right arm tremor. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that plaintiff’s relationship with his wife and his quality of life had been affected by his injuries. He suffers from depression and a personality change, with him being more aggressive and argumentative with a shorter temper. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that this was an effect of the closed-head injury. Defense counsel disputed the traumatic brain injury claims and the need for back surgery.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: $214,261 past medical; $39,390 future medical; $1,500,000 past pain and suffering; $2,000,000 future pain and suffering.

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Plaintiff: Demand: $2,195,000 (CCP § 998); Offer: $50,000 at time of trial.

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

Injured Man Blames Tow Trucks Erratic Driving For Sacramento Car Crash

May 14, 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: Kelly claimed that the accident aggravated a pre-existing lumbar condition, that he had disc herniations worsened or caused by the impact and that he had been asymptomatic before the accident. He sought treatment with Lenny Herman, the director of spinal trauma at Cedars-Sinai Hospital and underwent lumbar laminectomies at the L2-3, L4-5 and L5-S1 levels two months after the accident. Kelly claimed that as a result of the accident and surgery, his back will never be the same and he can no longer engage in skiing, golf and the many activities he had previously enjoyed.

Facts:

At 9 a.m. on Sept. 21, 2004, plaintiff Jason Kelly, a 52-year-old self-employed businessman, was driving his Porsche eastbound on the five-lane IHS in Sacramento, CA, when he was involved in a collision with ABC Supermarkets employee Red Merk and XYZ Towing Inc., employee Kent Cameron.

Claiming lower back injuries, Kelly sued ABC Supermarkets and XYZ Towing, Inc., for vicarious liability. In addition, Kelly named Cameron and Merk for motor vehicle negligence.

Cameron was driving his company’s tow truck, changing lanes from the far left and caused Merk to swerve from his lane into Kelly, who was in the middle lane.

Merk claimed that Cameron was driving erratically, that he signaled to move right from the far left lane, when he abruptly moved into Merk’s lane causing the accident. Merk had no time to stop or slow and swerved into the plaintiff’s vehicle. Cameron, 18, had only been driving for three months. He claimed that he had properly signaled and changed lanes when he observed Merk in his rearview mirror too close at approximately 75 mph and swerved into the plaintiff’s car.

Merk followed Cameron to the Haim Street off-ramp. He pulled him over and called the police.

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

Mother Claims Doctor’s Negligence Caused Twins to Be Born With Birth Injuries, Part 3 of 3

May 11, 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.)

The plaintiff’s expert neonatologist claimed that holding off the delivery for 48 hours would have permitted the babies’ lungs, gastrointestinal tract and brain to have matured sufficiently at 24 weeks gestation to avoid the subsequent damages the twins suffered, including brain damage to Ashley.

The defense’s expert perinatologist opined that Perk’s management of the two telephone calls he received from Teimen’s nurse met the standard of care, and that there was no indication for Teimen to be kept an additional 12 hours of observation with the administration of continuous tocolytics, antibiotics and betamethazone.

Teimen admitted at trial that although she was still feeling contractions when she was initially discharged from the hospital, she did not tell the nurse. She also claimed that she did not read the written discharge instructions she signed, which required her to stay at the hospital if her contractions were persistent.

Ashley, age 6 at trial, has developmental/cognitive delays, for which she receives speech therapy and oral aversion therapy. Chris, 6, has matured into a nearly normal child.

The plaintiffs’ claimed $5.72 million in medical costs to date, most of which was paid by private medical insurance.

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

Family Claims Medical Malpractice In Wrongful Death Lawsuit, Part 2 of 5

May 11, 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.)

From admission to Saturday, February 17, 2007, the patient’s conditions were stabilized. That morning, Dr. Reason postponed the surgery for that day because the patient had a high white blood cell count and asked the hematologist following the patient to decide whether this finding should further postpone the surgery. Dr. Haim testified that later that day, although no consultant specifically wrote “cleared for surgery,” the orders and notes of the hematologist and cardiologist clearly indicated to him that the patient could have the surgery the following morning, Sunday, February 18, 2007.

A nurse presented the written consent to the patient late in the afternoon of February 17 and testified that if she had had any suspicion that the patient was mentally incompetent or otherwise did not know what he was signing, she would have consulted with her charge nurse and most likely Dr. Haim. However, since that did not happen, she presumed she had no such suspicion. Dr. Reason was not aware of the plan for surgery in the morning.

The surgery went forward on Sunday morning, February 18, 2007, and no intra-operative complications arose. The patient’s blood loss of about 500 cc was “normal” for such a surgery. Over the next few days, the patient did reasonably well. However, on February 22, 2007, he developed low blood pressure and a high heart rate and was transferred to the ICU. His blood studies showed a significant anemia, suggesting blood loss from somewhere.

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

Fire Captain Claims She Was Fired After Sexual Advances Denied

May 9, 2012 | by Moseley Collins

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a sexual harassment 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 note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this sexual harassment case and its proceedings.)

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to court records: Defendant QRS Company employed plaintiff Janice Macy as a Fire Captain from March 14, 2008 through August 8, 2008. Plaintiff claimed she was subjected to sexual harassment and a hostile work environment on a daily basis. Prior to working for defendant QRS, plaintiff had been a firefighter for the City Fire Department. While with the City Fire Department, plaintiff was disabled and diagnosed with weakness in her left shoulder, weakness of her knees, and limitation of motion of the cervical and lumbar spine. Plaintiff sought a disability accommodation after being hired.

Plaintiff said defendant Chief Daniel Drake made advances toward her, kissed her on the lips, belittled her, verbally abused her, showed her a sexually suggestive video, talked about women he had sex with on multiple occasions in front of plaintiff, talked about the size of his penis, and engaged in other outrageous conduct in plaintiff’s presence.

Plaintiff said she was placed on leave by defendant from July 10, 2008 through August 8, 2008. According to plaintiff, she was wrongfully terminated in August 2008.

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

Teenage Boy Trapped In Vehicle After Drunk Driver Submerges It In River, Part 2 of 2

May 9, 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.)

It was suspected that, during this time, members of the party were trying to destroy the evidence of drinking and other illicit activity, waiting for Amos’s alcohol level to subside, and were developing their “story” to tell the police. While they waited to call police, Mark remained trapped in the back seat of the car submerged in the icy water at the bottom of the river.

Ultimately, hours later, Amos’ blood alcohol level was tested and estimated to have been above the legal limit at the time of the accident. He also tested positive for marijuana. The investigation determined that Amos drove into the river after missing a turn on a dirt road. Amos had a previous citation of reckless driving with alcohol on his record.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: Death.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: Not reported.

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Plaintiff: Not reported.

COMMENTS

According to Plaintiff: This case is unique in that the insurance company quickly settled the case against the adult who was trusted with the care of the teenager for policy limits.

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

Sacramento Medical Malpractice Suit Brought After Woman Claims Failure To Monitor

May 9, 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: Stevenson alleged anoxic brain injury resulting in some worsening of pre-existing memory and cognitive problems, including “flooding syndrome” or being overwhelmed and frustrated after becoming engaged in discussions or activities. She was in a rehab facility for a couple months and fell once or twice while there.

Facts:

On March 10, 2005, plaintiff Marla Stevenson, 56, a former licensed vocational nurse, was admitted to Sacramento Medical Center for repair of a broken Parkla. She was already being treated with methadone, 720 milligrams a day, for chronic pain related to spinal stenosis. After the knee surgery, she was moved to the regular floor. About 3.5 hours later, she experienced cardiopulmonary arrest of unknown length and cause. She was revived, but had an anoxic brain injury.

Stevenson sued the medical center; its owner; and her doctor, family practitioner Anthony Kerry, for medical malpractice. Kerry settled before trial for an undisclosed amount.

Stevenson charged that the medical center defendants should have had her on electronic monitoring, given the amount of pain medication she was on and given that, in the recovery room, heart arrhythmias were recorded. Also, the surgeon ordered post-recovery oxygen, and he and the ER doctor ordered a preoperative EKG, but neither order was followed.

Stevenson also claimed that the recovery room staff failed to pass information to the floor nurses.

The medical center defendants contended that monitoring is a physician’s decision and could have been ordered by a physician, that the arrhythmias were benign bigeminy, that a recorded ventricular fibrillation was misread by the monitor equipment, and that each arrhythmia was reported to Stevenson’s physicians.

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

Man Alleges Negligent Treatment At San Francisco Hospital Caused Arm Nerve Damage

May 9, 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: Jermaine claimed he sustained radial nerve damage in his dominant, left arm, as a result of the surgery performed by Euick. He claimed he suffers intractable neuropathic pain, as well as motor loss, in the arm. Jermaine has been on constant pain medication since the surgery.

Facts:

On July 21, 2006, plaintiff John Jermaine, 42, a heavy-equipment operator, underwent surgery to have what was diagnosed as a benign mass removed from his upper left arm. The surgery was performed by Dr. Jeffery Euick, who Jermaine was referred to by his general practitioner, and took place at San Francisco Hospital in San Francisco.

After surgery, Jermaine claimed he experienced muscle weakness and severe nerve pain. The mass was later diagnosed as a leiomyosarcoma, or a cancerous tumor. Jermaine underwent a subsequent surgery at UCLA Medical Center to excise further along the margins of the removed tumor.

Jermaine sued Euick and his employer alleging medical malpractice. He accused Euick of negligent treatment and claimed he failed to properly test and diagnose his cancerous tumor. He alleged his employer was vicariously liable for Euick’s actions.

Jermaine claimed Euick was negligent for failing to order and obtain a pre-operative MRI for surgical planning and for proceeding with a surgery that was more difficult than expected. He alleged Euick failed to diagnose the tumor as malignant, and should have performed a more timely biopsy, before the surgery. Jermaine further claimed that Euick was in way over his head, and that he should have been referred to an oncologic surgeon at a specialty hospital or tertiary center.

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

Driver Injured In Intersection Collision, Sustains Brain Injury, Part 1 of 2

May 8, 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: On June 24, 2009, plaintiff Mark Matt, a 74-year-old farmer, was driving a truck southbound on G Avenue when he came to a stop at the intersection with S Avenue and then began to proceed through the intersection. He was struck by a truck driven by defendant Reid Murphy, who was traveling eastbound on S Avenue making a delivery for his employer, HIS Services, to XYZ Services Inc. Murphy did not stop at a stop sign at the intersection.

Plaintiff sued Murphy, his employer, IHS, and XYZ, alleging that Murphy was negligent in the operation of the vehicle, while IHS and Sears were vicariously liable. Defendants filed a cross-complaint against Jim Marion for indemnification and apportionment of fault.

Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Murphy was not paying attention and was speaking to his assistant at the time of the accident. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that plaintiff stopped, looked both ways, and then proceeded into the intersection at 5 mph.

Murphy claimed that he could not see the stop sign because a freightliner truck owned and operated by Jim Marion was blocking his view.

Defense counsel argued that plaintiff was a substantial factor in the cause of the accident.

Plaintiff’s counsel argued that there were a number of warning signs to Murphy that a stop was coming.

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

Father Brings Wrongful Death Lawsuit After His Son Is Killed in Sacramento Car Accident

May 7, 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.)

Facts:

The plaintiff, a 36 year-old program Manager in the computer industry, was the father of a 7-year-old boy who died in a car accident on Aug. 11, 2006. The child’s mother, who was driving, was also killed, as was his older sister, age 9.

The plaintiff sued the mother’s estate and her widower. Against the mother’s estate, the plaintiff claimed wrongful death, and against the husband, he claimed negligent entrustment.

The plaintiff had primary custody of the child at the time of his death.

The accident occurred when the mother lost control of the Mercury Mountaineer she was driving east on IHS Highway 80 near Sacramento, CA. She and her husband, who was asleep in the passenger seat, were both wearing seatbelts. The children were in the back seat watching a DVD and were apparently not belted. The vehicle rolled over a number of times, and the children were ejected.

The plaintiff claimed that the mother was negligent in her failure to require the children to wear seatbelts.

The husband testified that when he went to sleep, the children were wearing their seatbelts and watching a DVD. According to both the surviving husband’s testimony and the plaintiff’s testimony, the mother had no history of driving irresponsibly.

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