Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Nurse’s Negligence Results in Sacramento Birth Injuries During Delivery, Part 1 of 3

February 16, 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.)

Specific Liability: Nursing staff failed to recognize the history and signs of placental abruption in a patient in labor and failed to take the necessary action to address the complication
General Injury: Hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and other perinatal and neonatal injuries, resulting in cerebral palsy, seizures, spastic quadriplegia, and dysfunction of multiple organs; impairment of the parent-child relationship; emotional distress; medical and care expenses; impaired earning ability
Summary of Facts:
According to the plaintiff:

Sarah Travis, who had a history of Caesarian section and placental abruption, was a candidate for a vaginal birth at Sacramento Hospital in Sacramento, CA. Sacramento Hospital had medical documentation indicating Travis had a high risk of placental abruption.

Travis called the hospital around 7:30 pm May 30, 2002, with complaints of increased cramping and contractions. The hospital’s charge nurse told her to come in for labor evaluation, but the nurses did not read her chart, know her medical history, or know her pregnancy risks.

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

Man Suffers Severe Injury When Sacramento Kaiser Fails to Diagnosis Aneurysm, Part 1 of 3

February 16, 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.)

TEXT:
CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiffs claimed that defendants failed to clip a ruptured aneurysm and monitor plaintiff patient’s condition in a skilled nursing facility. The plaintiffs were John Doe, 51, and his wife, Jane Doe, 48. The defendants were Kaiser Foundation Hospital and Kaiser-related entities. John Doe suffered a right superior cerebellar artery aneurysm on August 29, 1999. On October 16, 1999 he suffered a re-bleed of the aneurysm while residing in a skilled nursing facility. He now requires full-time care and is confined to Alta Bates Herrick Hospital where he is essentially bed-ridden.

Plaintiff patient was in good health until August 1999. He experienced some headaches which seemed to resolve. On August 29, however, the headaches were so severe that he reported to the emergency room at the Sacramento Hospital. While in the emergency room, he vomited, had a seizure and became unresponsive. He was intubated immediately. He was diagnosed with a subarachnoid hemorrhage, likely due to an aneurysm, and acute hydrocephalus. He was transferred by helicopter to Kaiser Sacramento, where he came under the care of respondents.

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

Sacramento Auto Accident Results in Catastrophic Injuries, Part 1 of 2

February 16, 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.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: In June 2008, plaintiff Matt Marrion, a 74-year-old farmer, was driving a truck southbound on El Dorado Hills Avenue when he came to a stop at the intersection with Grass Valley Avenue and then began to proceed through the intersection. He was struck by a truck driven by defendant Rod Martinez, who was traveling eastbound on Grass Valley Avenue making a delivery for his employer, Interstate Services, to ABC Logistics Services Inc. Martinez did not stop at a stop sign at the intersection.

Plaintiff sued Martinez, his employer, Interstate, and ABC Logistics, alleging that Martinez was negligent in the operation of the vehicle, while Interstate and ABC were vicariously liable. Defendants filed a cross-complaint against Jerry Mann for indemnification and apportionment of fault.

Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Martinez 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.

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

San Jose Medical Malpractice Case Results After Boy Suffers Catastrophic Brain Stem Injury, Part 1 of 2

February 16, 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: Catastrophic brain stem injury was reportedly caused by primary trauma associated with the herniation and massive subsequent hemorrhage. The teen is in a persistent vegetative state with a tracheotomy. He is dependent on a gastrostomy tube for nutrition and requires round-the-clock attendant care. Plaintiff experts calculated his monthly care costs to be $50,000.

Facts:

In April 2006, the plaintiff, a 13-year-old fifth-grader, presented to health care providers with complaints of persistent headaches for four days. Based upon a CT scan and the clinical presentation, the attending pediatric neurologist suspected that the headaches were due to increased intracranial pressure caused by a build up of cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) probably due to a ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt malfunction.

The plaintiff was born with hydrocephaly, a condition occurring secondarily to obstruction of the CSF pathways in the brain and accompanied by an accumulation of CSF within the skull. He had a VP shunt inserted, which drained CSF from the brain to the gut, decreasing and stabilizing intracranial pressure. The VP shunt was controlled by a pressure valve, which opens the shunt when excess CSF causes increased intracranial pressure. It is common for CSF to form clots, causing the shunt to malfunction.

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

Car Accident in Sacramento Leaves Man With Serious Injuries

February 16, 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: Cameron claimed he sustained herniated discs at L4-5 and L5-S1. He also complained of dizziness. He underwent three months of chiropractic treatment in addition to three lower back epidural injections. He did not work for approximately a year after the accident as he could not stand for more than 10 minutes at a time. He also underwent a microdiscectomy in May 2009. He may need additional epidural injections or a back fusion in the future.

Facts:

On Dec. 20, 2005, plaintiff Oliver Cameron, 37, a quality control inspector for medical supplies, was stopped at the intersection of Sacramento Avenue and Fair Oaks Street in Sacramento when his car was rear-ended by a delivery truck driven by Phil Lawry. Lawry was driving approximately 35 mph at the time of the accident.

Cameron sued Lawry and his employer, ABC Glass Systems Inc. He alleged that Lawry was negligent in the operation of his vehicle and that ABC was vicariously liable for Lawry’ actions.

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

Sacramento Woman Sues Hospital Over Damage Done to Her Face, Part 1 of 2

February 15, 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.)

Summary of Facts:

Mary Nevins said she was trained as a nurse but later began a career as a gala auctioneer, eventually becoming one of the best auctioneers in the Northwest.

She reportedly underwent a body scan in 2006 which revealed a right carotid artery significantly blocked with plaque. Nevins said she went to a Sacramento health facility to confirm her artery was blocked and determine what treatment was required. Sacramento health physicians reportedly confirmed that her artery was blocked and recommended a carotid endarterectomy.

Sam Oliver, MD, a vascular surgeon employed by Sacramento health, performed Nevins’s carotid endarterectomy June 12, 2006. Oliver reportedly used ultrasound to confirm the location of Nevins’s carotid bifurcation. Nevins said Oliver ligated and cut various branches of her facial vein to secure access to the internal carotid artery. Nevins claimed that while Oliver was ligating and cutting branches of her facial vein, he mistakenly cut her hypoglossal nerve.

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

Doctor Sued in Medical Malpractice Case After Failing to Properly Diagnose San Francisco Nurse, Part 3 of 3

February 14, 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.)

Plaintiffs’ experts contended that Plaintiff should have been referred earlier for a complete workup, and that the nurse practitioner had a duty to take the culture result very seriously in light of Plaintiff’s history of symptoms. In addition, Plaintiffs contended that the nurse practitioner should have taken the time to look up Streptococcus Viridans. Had the nurse practitioner done so, she would have found that it is not found on the skin. She would also have learned that it is the most common organism causing sub-acute endocarditis, and the Plaintiff had been experiencing all the classic symptoms of that condition.

As is true with most cases involving a negligent delay in diagnosis, the Defendent contended that Plaintiff was largely responsible for the delay, particularly since she had a nursing background; and that any negligence on the part of the health care provider occurred too late in the process to make that much of a difference. What made causation in this case somewhat more challenging was that Plaintiff’s more serious long-term injuries, including embolic brain injury, materialized more than two (2) weeks after she had began taking the appropriate IV antibiotics. Plaintiffs’ causation experts maintained that Streptococcus Viridans is readily treatable; however, the multiple trials of inadequate antibiotics only moderated the symptoms without killing the organism. Consequently, the negligent delay in referral enabled the bacteria to build up on her aortic valve, and to form a biofilm barrier that inhibited the effectiveness of the IV antibiotics and her body’s natural defenses.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Big Rig Runs over Teenager Causing Serious and Life Threatening Injuries, Part 2 of 2

February 14, 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.)

At the time of the accident, ABC was performing a construction contract for the City of Sacramento. Plaintiff alleged that the City knew, or should have known, that the ABC dump truck/trailer was a hazard at certain City intersections, as it could not make an intersectional turn without substantially encroaching into the opposite lane of traffic. Plaintiff further alleged that the City’s contract specifications with ABC Construction required “re-routing” of the contractor’s heavy equipment away from after-school pedestrian routes used by grammar school children.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff sustained life-threatening, near-amputation of his left leg; large right leg laceration; blunt abdominal trauma; repeated orthopedic, neurological, and plastic surgeries.

CLAIMED DAMAGES

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff’s past medical bills exceeded $500,000. Plaintiff’s Life Care Plan prepared by Sams & Associates, Rehabilitation and Life Care Planners stated plaintiff’s future medical expenses for “one time” future surgeries were approximately $305,000 at present cost.

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

Two Motorcyclists Injured in Sacramento; Severe Brain Injury in One Plaintiff, Part 3 of 4

February 14, 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.)

Danbee Livestock’s trailer operator testified that he had possessed the trailer since it was new in 1993. He was responsible for all maintenance on it, but only kept maintenance records in his head. He took it to XYZ or D-2 when it needed work and told XYZ or D-2 personnel generally what parts of the trailer he wanted work performed on. Invoices presented at trial established that there was no regular maintenance program for the trailer. Before trial, and again after all evidence had been presented, plaintiffs sought a judicial determination that Danbee Livestock could not delegate its duty to maintain the trailer and its wheel bearings to XYZ and/or D-2. The court declined to so rule. The court also declined to apply res ipsa loquitur against Danbee Livestock. The court instead instructed the jury on presumption of negligence per se under CACI Instruction 418 and Vehicle Code § 24002(a).

The only documented work on the trailer’s wheel bearings was performed by D-2 in 2002 and 2004 and by XYZ in 2005 when it repacked the trailer’s wheel bearings while doing brake replacement. Plaintiffs and defendant Danbee Livestock contended, through the testimony of plaintiffs’ expert Dame and Danbee Livestock’s experts Curt and Williamson, that XYZ improperly cleaned the wheel bearings prior to their inspection, thereby rendering inspection ineffective, and that the cleaning method used, wiping with shop rags and pumping new grease into the bearings with a “bearing packer,” left dirt and grit which caused rapid wear.

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

San Jose Medical Malpractice Case Due To Missed Early Diagnosis in Breast Cancer Case, Part 2 of 2

February 8, 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.)

Plaintiff then underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy with Taxol, Adriamycin, and Cytoxan. She underwent bilateral mastectomies on January 4, 2009. A residual tumor measuring 5.5 cm was found in the upper outer quadrant of the right breast. Axillary node sampling revealed five metastatic nodes.

In May 2010, plaintiff was diagnosed with metastatic disease to the lung, liver, and bone. This represents incurable Stage IV disease.

Plaintiffs alleged that the June 30, 2006 mammogram showed a new density in the right superior breast on the MLO study. They contended that this finding should have been appreciated, that the mammogram should have been read as a BIRADS 0, and further imaging studies should have been conducted. Plaintiffs argued that had this been accomplished, it was medically probable that the diagnosis would have been made in July 2006 rather than July 2008. Plaintiffs further alleged that, had the diagnosis been made in July 2006, with the same chemotherapy as she received in 2008, her likelihood of cure would have been upwards of 70 percent.

The defense contended that the June 30, 2006 mammogram was properly read. They further contended that plaintiff was herself at fault for not obtaining a mammogram in June 2007, as instructed. Had she been compliant, her cancer would have been diagnosed based on a June 2007 mammogram and her cancer was curable at that time.

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