Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Recruiters Use Position to Sexually Harass Two Sacramento Teenagers, Part 2 of 3

January 31, 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.)

Plaintiffs’ counsel claimed that Damon used the No Child Left Behind database to locate female students that he could recruit for the ABC Company. According to counsel, the database allowed for Damon to acquire Dallas’s home address and visit the plaintiff in fall 2003. Counsel further alleged that, shortly after he initially visited Dallas, Damon invited her to the ABC Company’ Sacramento recruiting office where he supplied her with liquor and had sex with her on February 3, 2004 and March 4, 2004. Counsel then claims that Damon used an unsupervised sleepover event on March 17-18, 2004, to coordinate a third sexual encounter, this time with Dallas bringing her friend, Martha Rice, who had sex with Fallows.

Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the two recruiters used their status as Marine recruiters to persuade and coerce the two high school students into having sex with them. Counsel also maintained that Damon and Fallows provided the girls with alcohol and Vicodin, pulled out mats from the closet and then raped them. According to counsel, Damon went so far as to tell Dallas that the only way that she’d get into the ABC Company was if she allowed him to have sex with her.

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

Sacramento Birth Injury Case Results After Doctor Fails to Report Abnormal Pregnancy Issues, Part 1 of 2

January 31, 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: Alex was born with cerebral palsy with moderate to severe developmental delay.

Facts:

On May 21, 2004, plaintiff, age and profession undisclosed, was due to give birth. In the preceding months, her pregnancy was being followed by obstetrician Hammer and a nurse practitioner at the ABC Medical Center.

All exams were recorded on a computer. An early ultrasound was normal, and Plaintiff’s AFP testing was normal. However, the computer program made it difficult to compare results from successive exams without printing out additional documents. Thus, there were no notes recording that Plaintiff had minimal weight gain in her last trimester or that there was a significant discrepancy between her fundal heights and gestational age.

On May 8, the fundal height dropped from 36 cm to 33 cm with a three-pound weight gain over the previous 11 weeks.

On May 14, Plaintiff was at 39 weeks gestation, and the fundal height was 34 cm.

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

Family of Man Exposed to Asbestos Presents Wrongful Death Injury Lawsuit in Sacramento, Part 4 of 4

January 31, 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 wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

In addition to the above mentioned, it was believed and further alleged that decedent was exposed to asbestos fibers, particles, and dust as a result of construction remodel work performed on his own personal residences and during the time employed as a maintenance worker at the JV School District, which occurred from the mid-1960s until the late 1970s. As a result of such work, decedent mixed, sanded, and applied joint compound products manufactured/supplied/sold by the following defendants: BI Inc./PM International Inc., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to PM Inc. (BD joint compound); GP Corporation (GP joint compound); and KG Company Inc. (KG joint compound). Upon information and belief, such joint compound did not have a warning on the containers regarding the dangers associated with asbestos, and decedent, as such, did not protect himself with a mask when working with the joint compound products.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Defendant: Death; loss of consortium.

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

Motorcycle Accident Causes Severe Brain Damage, Part 1 of 4

January 31, 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 Plaintiff: Plaintiffs One, then age 47, and Two, then age 53, had been aircraft industry mechanics their entire adult lives until they purchased an auto-wrecking yard in Sacramento, California in June 2005. Close friends since the mid-1980s, they discovered the wrecking yard for sale while on a Sierra gold-mining vacation in the summer of 2004.

On June 24, 2006, after closing their wrecking yard for the night, plaintiffs got on their Harley-Davidson motorcycles and proceeded down the Sacramento Canyon. The purpose of the trip was to inspect a forklift located in Sacramento and which they contemplated purchasing for use in their business. At approximately 9:05 p.m., Plaintiff Two struck a wheel and tire assembly while riding on I-50 near the western end of the Sacramento Canyon. Approximately one minute later, Plaintiff One arrived on the scene and struck the same tire. Both men were separated from their motorcycles and sustained serious personal injuries.

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

Infant Born at Sacramento Kaiser Hospital Has Permanent Brain Damage, Part 4 of 4

January 25, 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.)

Plaintiffs further alleged that, if the infant had been properly monitored and given supplemental formula feedings, his blood sugar would not have dropped to a level low enough to cause brain damage.

Defendants contended that their care met the required standard in all respects. Defendants further contended that the infant was feeding well at the breast, as documented by the records and the testimony of the nurses and the infant’s grandmother, and that the infant’s hypoglycemia was due to an unpredictable, transient metabolic abnormality rather than to inadequate oral intake.

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: Brain lesion; failure to develop normally; seizures; 24-hour tube feeding; emotional distress.

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

Man Severely Injured When Sacramento Doctors Failed To Provide Proper Diagnosis, Part 2 of 2

January 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.)

Plaintiff’s physicians took him back to surgery on September. 2, for thecal decompression and exploratory surgery. After the decompression of the fluid collection, he was discharged home approximately two weeks later, with minimal improvement in his condition. In mid-October, Plaintiff was seen by a neurosurgeon and diagnosed with bilateral lower extremity saddle paresthesia, penile/scrotum anesthesia, urinary and fecal incontinence, paresthesia lateral and posterior aspects of both legs and pedal and lower extremity edema. He was told that the symptoms have been present for so long that the damage was permanent.

A further evaluation was performed on January 13, 2008, in Sacramento. Plaintiff was diagnosed with cauda equina syndrome and chronic pain syndrome due to cauda equina compression by post-operative fluid following the August 19, 2006 spine surgery. The physician noted that Plaintiff manifested the symptoms of cauda equina syndrome nearly immediately after surgery. The doctor stated when cauda equina symptoms are present, the standard of care requires it to be addressed expeditiously as an emergency.

Plaintiff and his wife sued the United States (which runs the VA hospitals). They claimed that post-operative changes were symptoms of cauda equina syndrome, which is an emergency requiring prompt surgical intervention to reduce pressure on the cauda equina nerves. Further, they argued that the U.S. government health care providers were negligent in failing to timely respond to his post-operative cauda equina syndrome by decompressing the nerves in a timely manner.

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

San Jose Man Sues Hospital in Medical Malpractice Suit, Part 3 of 3

January 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.)

The defense denied liability, asserting that the stroke was related to Serreno’s diabetes, rather than the injection of Phenergan into the artery. Counsel also contended that the line was not arterially placed, but properly placed in the vein.

Following the injury, Serreno was placed on disability and claimed that he will likely be unable to engage in employment that requires standing, walking or balancing. He alleged that the injury had a substantial effect on his career as a security guard and police officer, and that he is now limited to potential desk jobs. He further claimed that even a desk job would be difficult, due to the extremely limited use of his left, non-dominant arm.

Serreno claimed past lost earnings of $113,862, and future lost earnings of $1,653,031, based on a loss of earning capacity of $50,320 a year. He further sought pain and suffering damages of $250,000 (capped by MICRA). He did not seek medical costs.

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

Woman Severely Injured in Sacramento Car Accident When Rear-Ended, Part 1 of 2

January 25, 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: Several days after the accident, the plaintiff visited her general physician for neck pain. After an extended course of pain medications and physical therapy, an MRI revealed a herniation at L4-5. She underwent a laminectomy and cervical fusion more than a year after the accident.

Facts:

On December 14, 2008, the plaintiff, a nursing assistant, was stopped on ABC Avenue in Sacramento when her vehicle was struck from behind by a car driven by the defendant. The impact was approximately 10 mph, and the damage sustained by both cars was minimal. The police were not summoned.

The plaintiff sued the defendant for motor vehicle negligence.

The defendant did not test liability.

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

2.5 Million Awarded in Sacramento Medical Malpractice Case, Part 4 of 4

January 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.)

Defense obstetrics expert James Pale opined that the nursing care and treatment were up to the standard of care at all times. He added that there was never any convincing evidence of maternal hyperstimulation or fetal distress.

The defense also argued that nurses have implied discretion over Picotin levels, and that they are allowed to change dosage levels as per their instinct and experience.

Plaintiff’s life care planning expert, Shannon Karreon, estimated that the baby will live 45 years and will need 16 hours of home care every day. As part of an unspecified demand, plaintiff’s counsel calculated a life care plan that would include an annuity of $2.5 million.

Defense counsel disputed the damages, and defense life care planner Tom Lowitz predicted that the baby’s life expectancy was a maximum of 14 years. The defense calculated a life care plan that would include an annuity of $1.8 million.

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

Diabetic Gets Leg Amputated In San Francisco Medical Malpractice Case, Part 3 of 3

January 24, 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.)

First, she created a large, 8-square-inch open wound on the foot of a diabetic patient, knowing that even tiny open wounds can quickly become infected. However, she failed to prescribe antibiotics to guard against such infection. Knowing the potential for infection, she took a culture of the wound, which she sent to the San Francisco Hospital lab.

Further, she tightly covered the open wound with multiple layers of gauze and elastic. Among other things, this made it impossible for the condition of the wound to be observed by the patient or anyone else. It also may have diminished plaintiff’s otherwise-healthy circulation in that foot.

Worst of all, she made no provision for frequent observation of the wound to monitor its status. She could have hospitalized plaintiff or could have arranged to have his wound checked either at her office or by another provider. By failing to provide for such observation, and, indeed, forbidding the patient to remove the elastic dressings, she prevented plaintiff’s infection from being discovered and remedied at a point in time when his leg could have been treated and saved. At some point between the 12th and the 16th, the foot became unsalvageable, but if it had been properly monitored, he could have been started on IV antibiotic treatment immediately upon observation of infection (if not before), and the leg could have been saved.

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