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.)

Individually and on Naomi’s behalf, Martinez sued Salmon and Bakings Medical, saying that they should immediately have treated the child or consulted a pediatric infectious disease specialist.

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.)

The results of the blood workup would be reported to her primary care provider within three days. Three days later, Plaintiff went to her clinic, along with her whole family, to find out what those tests showed and to see whether it was okay to go on their vacation. Her symptoms were continuing, but now she complained of a swollen tender sternum. The nurse practitioner looked through the results of the tests and saw that the laboratory found two out of two bottles positive for Streptococcus Viridans. According to Plaintiff and her ten-year-old son, the nurse practitioner commented words to the effect, “Oh, by the way, they found some Strep in the tests, but that must be a skin contaminant. Go on your vacation, have a great time, and when you come back if you are still feeling ill, then you can have more blood work done.”
In the meantime, the nurse practitioner gave Plaintiff another Z-pak, just in case she still had a lingering low-grade infection, another prescription for Maxalt and a prescription for percocet for pain. The nurse practitioner testified in her deposition that she suggested that Plaintiff could stop by the hospital for a blood test on the way to her family vacation. Plaintiff denied that the nurse practitioner made such a suggestion, and there was nothing in the nurse’s notes to that effect. Again, the Z-pak provided only temporary relief of Plaintiff’s symptoms. Her family cut short their vacation and she returned once more to the clinic only to be prescribed another ineffectual antibiotic.
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 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.)

In summation, plaintiffs’ counsel maintained that the two plaintiffs were entitled to the same protection from sexual harassment as they would receive in any other employment context.

ABC Company denied that it negligently hired, trained or supervised its recruiters. Counsel for the defense argued that the two minors were motivated by their interest in having sex with military men and they weren’t raped because the sex was consensual. Counsel referenced Dallas and Rice’s videotaped statements to the Mendocino DA and the Sacramento Police Department that identified the sex as consensual to exemplify the assertions. Counsel also noted that the DA elected not to press charges based on that evidence.

Counsel further maintained that the two recruiters didn’t require any additional supervision during the sleepover event because they were properly trained ABC Company and their commanding officer would have had no reason to believe that they would have behaved improperly during the event.

Regarding the allegations that Damon had used his position as a recruiter to coerce a student into having sex with him on a previous occasion, counsel asserted that the ABC Company investigated the allegations and found that they weren’t credible. Counsel further contended that neither Damon nor anyone else used the No Child Left Behind database to locate Dallas. In fact, counsel argued that Dallas had already contacted another recruiter in Sacramento prior to moving to Folsom. Counsel asserted that Dallas then contacted the Placerville recruiting office which referred her to Damon’s Sacramento office. Dallas then asked the Placerville recruiter to have Damon call her.

Counsel also argued that neither of the plaintiffs ended up joining the ABC Company despite their aspirations to do so. Thus counsel asserted a claim for injunctive relief that the two plaintiffs would recruit again if they felt assured that a similar occurrence would be properly prevented from happening in the future if they elected to join the ABC Company.

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 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.)

When the labor and delivery nurse returned from lunch at 11:30 a.m., she noticed decreased variability with late decelerations on the fetal movements. At 11:50 a.m., she called the obstetrician, who arrived at Plaintiff’ bedside by 12:15 p.m. Fifteen minutes later, the doctor ordered a C-section, and the baby, plaintiff Alex, was delivered at 1:05 p.m. with no breathing and a heart rate below 100. The respiratory therapist had difficulty placing the ET tube, not succeeding until 1:18 p.m.

At 1:30 p.m., pediatrician Evans was called, and the neonatal intensive care unit transfer team arrived at 3 p.m. The pediatric neurologist at the transfer hospital, ABC Hospital of Folsom, diagnosed hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, and Alex was discharged on June 8.

In December, Alex underwent placement of a gastrostomy feeding tube.

Claiming physical damages, Plaintiffs–including plaintiff and father, age and profession undisclosed–sued the hospital and its owner, as well as the University of California and Hammer for medical malpractice.

Pediatrician Earl was originally included as a defendant, but was dismissed with prejudice in exchange for a waiver of costs at mediation.

Plaintiffs’ counsel claimed that Hammer and the nurse practitioner failed to recognize the abnormal progress of Plaintiff’ pregnancy and thus failed to order ultrasound testing and earlier delivery before she went into labor.

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 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.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff, age 14 at the time of the accident, was walking from his school to tutor a classmate in math. As plaintiff was walking to his friend’s house, Defendant was driving an ABC Construction Services Inc. dump truck weighing 80,000 lbs, hauling a trailer weighing 19,600 lbs, with a “street paver” of unknown weight loaded on the trailer. The combination dump truck/trailer was in excess of 55 feet in length. Defendant was traveling west on Cyprus Street, intending to turn north onto N. Fort Street in the City of Sacramento, California. Both Defendant and his employer, defendant John Sann of ABC, knew from actual experience driving at this particular intersection that the ABC dump truck/trailer combination could not make a northbound turn from westbound Cyprus Street onto northbound Fort Street without encroaching 6 feet into the oncoming southbound traffic lane of Fort Street.

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

Continue Reading ›

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.)

Plaintiff One was wearing a non-DOT-approved helmet, characterized by the defense as a “novelty helmet,” when his accident occurred. Defense expert Ramieen Kalzi testified that the “novelty helmet” afforded One no protection from head injury. Kalzi based his opinion solely on standardized testing he did on exemplar helmets and made no effort to either replicate the accident or determine what forces would render a DOT-approved helmet ineffective. Plaintiffs’ neurosurgeon Dr. Jim Iman testified that One could have sustained permanent brain injury from several causes, including inadequate brain oxygenation over a period of time, and that it was impossible to isolate the actual cause. Defense neurologist Dr. Jeff Samson testified that One’s brain injury was caused solely by forces which had been transmitted through the helmet. All experts agreed that One’s extensive orthopedic injuries were unaffected by the type of helmet he wore.

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.)

CASE INFORMATION

According to Plaintiff: Plaintiff, currently a 42-year-old accountant at a bank, underwent a mammogram on June 30, 2006 read by defendant radiologist. The study was interpreted as a BI-RADS 1, within normal limits. She was instructed to return for an additional screening mammogram one year later, but did not.

Plaintiff next underwent a screening mammogram on April 5, 2008. That study was read as showing a density in the right upper breast on the MLO view only. The report stated that the density had increased in size from the 2007 study. The study was read as BIRADS 0, additional studies needed. Plaintiff then underwent a diagnostic mammogram and ultrasound on April 20, 2008. These studies were interpreted by defendant as benign, BI-RADS III, follow up in four months requested.

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

Continue Reading ›

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.)

The plaintiff had an assortment of pre-existing ailments and injuries dating back to the early 1990s, including neck pain and migraines, defense counsel noted. The plaintiff was also involved in at least two accidents prior to this incident, including one in 1999, when she hired an attorney and claimed cervical injury.

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: On March 11, Naomi stopped eating and responding to stimuli and became very lethargic. Martinez brought her to the Bakings Medical ER, where the baby’s lesions were cultured and diagnosed as herpes simplex virus 2 meningeoencephalitis.

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.)

TEXT:

2007 – Plaintiff, female age 45, had worked as a surgical nurse until 10 years ago when the first of her four boys was born. She intended to go back to nursing sometime after her youngest was in school. Beginning in mid-November 2007, Plaintiff went in to her local clinic complaining of an occasional fever of 102.5, general aches and fatigue. The nurse practitioner suspected influenza. Six days later, Plaintiff returned and told the nurse practitioner that her continuing symptoms were making it hard for her to care for her children. Although she did not have a fever at that time, the nurse practitioner suggested that Plaintiff might wish to get checked out at the local hospital, but that she could prescribe a Z-pak to see whether that would work. A Z-pak is a general spectrum of oral antibiotic. Plaintiff chose to try the Z-pak. The Z-pak seemed to temper Plaintiff’s symptoms over the next week, but then the symptoms reappeared along with other symptoms.

Plaintiff returned to the clinic, and this time, she reported a headache, muscle aches, fatigue, night sweats, chest tightening and an unproductive cough. She said that the night sweats were so bad that she was wrapping herself in towels to keep from soaking her bed. The doctor told her that she was likely pre-menopausal, despite the fact that she was still having regular periods. He also told her that overweight people often sweat at night. As to her feeling so fatigued, the doctor noted that after all, she had four active boys. He thought her headaches might be from migraines, and so he prescribed Maxalt.

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

Continue Reading ›

Contact Information