Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Doctor Sued After Mother Claims Negligence On His Part To Delay Birth, Part 1 of 3

April 26, 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.)

INJURIES: The twins were both transferred to ABC Childrens Hospital, where Ashley was a patient for six months and Chris for four months. They were thereafter seen by multiple specialists at Stanford Medical and in the Modesto area. Ashley had surgery at Stanford for perforation of her intestines, and also had a gastrostomy feeding tube placed.

Community College Secretary Claims Sexual Harassment And Rape From Dean

April 25, 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.)

INJURIES: Armian made an unspecified demand for past and future emotional distress and wage loss.

Facts:

From 2007 to 2009, plaintiff Natalie Armian, late 20s/early 30s, a secretary at XYZ College, was allegedly sexually harassed by John Samson, 70s, who was then the interim dean of fine arts.

Armian sued XYZ, Samson and Samson’s boss, Fred Amy, the vice president for academic affairs, for sexual harassment under the California Fair Housing and Employment Act.

According to the complaint, Samson hugged Armian for “an uncomfortably long time” when they were first introduced in March 2007, making sure that his body rubbed against her breasts.

On Sept. 14, 2007, Armian was driving Samson to a surprise birthday party at a restaurant, when he allegedly groped her and pushed his head into her groin area, suggesting that they go to a hotel. He also patted her on the head, plaintiff’s counsel asserted.

On Sept. 15, Samson raped Armian, she claimed.

According to plaintiff’s counsel, in August 2009, Samson presented Armian with two performance evaluations. One was negative; the other was positive. He then started rubbing Armian’s legs and asked her to make a decision about her which review she preferred.

Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that Armian filed several complaints with XYZ’s human resources department, but the department never responded.

Armian also claimed that Amy’s unfair treatment of her preceded Samson’s hiring. She alleged that Amy forced Samson’s predecessor to give her negative performance reviews.

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

Two Teenagers Hit By Boat After Product Acts Defectively

April 25, 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: Lydia alleged mild traumatic brain injury, which caused memory loss and problems with her focus and concentration; disc herniations at L4-L5 and L5-S1; chronic pain syndrome; and emotional distress.

FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to court records: On August 25, 2004, defendants Jane and Samantha Berlin rented a boat and inner-tubes from plaintiff ABC Boat Rentals. The towline of the inner-tube became caught in the steering mechanism of the boat, the cable that triggered the forward and reverse gears was damaged, and the fuel line was broken, leaving the boat unable to be steered. When the boat’s throttle handle was shifted into “forward,” the boat banked sharply to the left. The boat continued to circle uncontrollably and struck defendants as they attempted to lunge from the inner-tube. Both teenagers were struck by the boat, but Jane was caught in the rapidly spinning propeller.

Following an open-water rescue, Jane Berlin was brought to UCSD Medical Center and emergently admitted.

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking to exonerate or limit its liability because Amy Berlin rearranged the towlines on the vessel from the “Y” arrangement installed by plaintiff.

Defendants claimed that plaintiff never instructed them on how to attach the towlines and that the towlines were never arranged in a “Y” formation.

CLAIMED INJURIES
According to court records:

Jane Berlin: Skull fracture; teeth; jaw fracture; shoulder fracture; neck fracture; neck lacerations; shoulder lacerations; arm lacerations; traumatic brain injuries; post-traumatic stress disorder; headaches; emotional distress. Samantha Berlin: Leg and foot bruising.

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

San Jose Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Brought Against Hospital After Study Goes Wrong, Part 1 of 2

April 25, 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 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: William claimed that between 2004, when he first presented with glaucoma symptoms, and 2009, when he was diagnosed with glaucoma, he suffered the loss of more than 90 percent of his visual fields, progressive optic nerve damage and continuing damage to nerve fibers, as well as continuing and progressive “cupping” of his optic nerves. He claimed that the negligent treatment proximately caused a need for invasive glaucoma surgery in both eyes, with the left one needing further surgical revisions, and that this has caused him to be rendered legally blind. He said he has almost no peripheral vision left, but he does have remaining visual acuity (i.e., he is able to see straight ahead). He can also read, watch television and see his wife, children and grandchildren.

Nursing Home Understaffed Leads to Woman’s Death in Sacramento Medical Malpractice Suit, Part 2 of 2

April 25, 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.)

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff’s last settlement demand of $650,000 was met with defendants’ final pre-trial offer of $30,000.

EXPERT TESTIMONY

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff’s experts testified that the defendant skilled nursing facility recklessly delayed obtaining treatment for decedent’s fractured hip for over 8 days and recklessly failed to prevent decedent from developing a severe pressure sore. The testimony was that both the delay and the pressure sore were substantial factors in causing decedent’s death. Defendants’ experts testified that the skilled nursing facility complied with the standard of care and that its conduct did not cause decedent’s death.

COMMENTS

According to Plaintiff: The complaint was filed on October 6, 2006. The jury was individually polled on their finding of liability, with a result of a 12-0 unanimous verdict in favor of liability in the total amount of $1,100,000. The jury was also individually polled on their finding of punitive damages, with a result of a 12-0 unanimous verdict in favor of punitive damages in the total amount of $28,000,000. The Sacramento Bee reported this case to be the largest plaintiff’s injury verdict in Sacramento history.

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

Infant Born with Significant Neurological Abnormalities in San Francisco Medical Malpractice Lawsuit, Part 2 of 2

April 25, 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.)

At 32 weeks, the perinatologist interpreted the ultrasound as showing calcifications in the liver, intrauterine growth retardation and polyhydramnios. An amniocentesis confirmed the presence of chickenpox viral DNA in the amniotic fluid, with no other abnormalities shown on the ultrasound or amniocetesis. At 36 weeks, the second obstetrician delivered the baby via Caesarean section.

The baby had significant neurological abnormalities.

The plaintiff and her fiancé sued the first obstetrician, the second obstetrician, the perinatologist and the genetics counselor for medical malpractice.

Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the second obstetrician should have vaccinated the plaintiff mother before she became pregnant; the second obstetrician should have administered VZIG after exposure to the chickenpox virus; and the defendants should have recommended amniocentesis and discovered signs of congenital varicella on ultrasound before 26 weeks gestation.

The defense contended that the vaccination had been recommended to the plaintiffs; that VZIG was not proven to protect fetuses from congenital chicken pox; and that the plaintiffs had the option of having amniocentesis, and that ultrasound abnormalities did not show up until 32 weeks gestation.

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

Brain Injury Sustained After Car Collision With Sheriff Deputy

April 24, 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.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS
According to court records: On June 29, 2008, plaintiff Emerson Adword drove a vehicle owned by plaintiff Cynthia Adword east on Garden Grove Boulevard through an intersection in Los Angeles. Defendant Ralph Merick drove south on the street.

Plaintiff alleged defendant Merick drove over the speed limit and entered the intersection on a red light. Plaintiff also claimed defendant Merick was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident.

Defendant Merick’s vehicle was owned by the County of Los Angeles and defendant Merick was allegedly working in the course and scope of his employment with the sheriff’s department at the time of the collision.

Plaintiff alleged defendants Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and County of Los Angeles negligently trained, supervised, hired, controlled, operated, and dispatched defendant.

Defendants contended it was disputed who proceeded into the intersection against a red signal. Defendants Merick and County of Los Angeles cross-complained against plaintiffs for comparative indemnity.

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

Woman Claims Sacramento Car Accident Causes Cervical Injury

April 23, 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: Surrie had a corpectomy procedure in May 2004 at C6 for a disc herniation at C6-7. She denied any previous cervical symptoms or treatment prior to the accident.

Facts:

On Oct. 31, 2003, Casey Surrie, the plaintiff, 46, was in the course and scope of her employment as a paratransit driver, driving a 2001 Ford Crown Victoria sedan. She was stopped at an intersection in Folsom, when her vehicle was hit from behind by a 1991 Ford Escort station wagon driven by the Samantha Lemons, who was in the course and scope of her employment with Sacramento Farm. Lemons was driving at 10 to 15 miles per hour at the time of impact.

Surrie sued Lemons and Sacramento Farm for negligent operation of a motor vehicle.
Lemons admitted liability for the accident, but contested causation.

Surrie’s passenger was taken by ambulance to the hospital. Surrie herself declined treatment at the scene.

A neurosurgeon testifying for Surrie contended that her cervical condition and resulting treatment were caused by the car accident. He also claimed that she would require future surgery to address adjacent vertebral segments, which would be weakened by the fused levels addressed in the first surgery.

The neurosurgeon who performed the corpectomy testified that Surrie suffered from degenerative changes to the cervical spine and that, even without the accident, she might have required surgery. He contended that surgery was necessary due to Surrie’s right side symptoms. Taller further claimed that a rear-end impact like the one Surrie suffered would not result in structural damage to the cervical spine.

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

Accident Leads To Death of Church Bus Driver in San Francisco

April 20, 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 Merryweather then moved over as far as he could in the right lane toward the center line in an effort to give decedent and the bus as much room as possible.

Defendant Carreon said he never observed this movement or any other type of warning from Merryweather. The two vehicles contacted each other, with the tractor of the ABC Group truck coming into contact with the rear trailer of the ABC Produce vehicle. This caused the two vehicles to become entangled, with the rear trailer swinging out to the right and striking the bus and decedent, killing him instantly.

Plaintiff Barrom Yemming was on the bus at the time of the impact, knew that his uncle was down on the driver’s side and believed he saw him flying through the air. Defendant Carreon made a statement at the scene that for some reason he moved his vehicle to the right and that precipitated the contact. He denied making that statement to the CHP officer at his deposition and during trial.

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

Family Claims Delayed C-section Caused Brain Injury In Infant

April 19, 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.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Defendant: Plaintiffs Marvin Zeref, a minor by and through his guardian ad litem, Menwa Zeref, Menwa Zeref, and Elief Zeref IV alleged that delayed performance of a C-section resulted in permanent neurologic injuries due to prolonged fetal distress. Mrs. Zeref was admitted to the hospital in the late evening. She was seen by Nurse #1, who admitted her to Labor and Delivery, reviewed the fetal heart rate strip, and reported telephonically to the obstetrician on call for the patient’s medical group. Nurse #2 took over the care at 3:00 a.m. She spoke to the obstetrician at about 3:30 a.m. The obstetrician ordered preparation for a C-section. The incision was not done until 4:39 a.m. The baby was born severely depressed, resuscitated, and transferred to the NICU.

Plaintiffs alleged that there was progressively worsening fetal distress caused by a worsening placental abruption. The delay in the C-section was due to nursing and “hospital” negligence in not summoning a back-up anesthesiologist, as the anesthesiologist assigned to Labor and Delivery was doing another C-section. The baby would have been normal if born 30 to 45 minutes sooner. The hospital violated the “30-minute rule” (decision to incision). The obstetrician, before she resolved her portion of the case, gave a deposition in which she was highly critical of the nurses. At trial, she was, again, very critical of the nurses. Plaintiffs’ nursing expert provided a long list of criticisms of the nurses. Plaintiffs’ “hospital administration expert” was permitted to testify over the objections of the hospital as he had no training or licensure as a nurse or a medical doctor.

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