Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice/personal injury case and its proceedings.)
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.
THE DECLARATION OF RANDALL BROWN, M.D., CLEARLY ESTABLISHES THAT DEFENDANTS WERE NEGLIGENT AND THAT DEFENDANTS’ NEGLIGENCE PROXIMATELY CAUSED INJURY TO PLAINTIFF
Even though plaintiff should have no obligation to present any evidence since defendants have failed to carry their initial burden of proof, nevertheless plaintiff submits the declaration of Randall Brown, M.D. Dr. Brown has several specific criticisms of Dr. Lee’s level of care and treatment, and he ties these criticisms specifically to the medical history.
First, Dr. Brown has declared that the augmentation surgery was scheduled too soon after Ms. White had given birth, and that this was below the standard of care. The surgery was scheduled only six months after Ms. White had stopped breast feeding her baby.
Second, Dr. Lee advised Ms. White to daily massage her breasts following the augmentation surgery; this was below the standard of care as massaging stimulated milk production.
Third, Dr. Lee negligently managed Ms. White’s lactation and breast drainage by removing the drains too soon, only to have to re-install them soon after.
Dr. Brown specifically declares that the care by Dr. Lee was below the standard of care.
Causation is also established by Dr. Brown: improper scheduling of the surgery directly led to the bad results of the surgery; negligent management of lactation and drainage resulted in bilateral mastitis, a fever of 104, and a staphylococcus infection that required removal of the implants and caused scarring necessitating future surgery; Dr. Lee’s errors delayed Ms. White’s ability to return to work; and Ms. White was required to seek emergency room care and to undergo surgical procedures which would not have been necessary but for Dr. Lee’s negligence.
These specific statements, clearly tied to the facts established by the medical records, establish a triable issue of material fact.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated, the motion must be denied.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.