Sacramento Hospital Patient Died From “Safe” Procedure Due To Malpractice, Part 9 of 13

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, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Sutter, or any skilled nursing facility.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death case and its proceedings.)

2. Plaintiffs have produced testimony that the injury suffered by appellant ordinarily does not happen in the absence of negligence

Plaintiffs’ expert has testified that the damage sustained by the deceased plaintiff would not ordinarily have occurred unless someone was negligent.

Plaintiffs submit that from the testimony of plaintiffs’ expert (and defendant doctor himself) the outcome of Ms. Smith’s surgery was unacceptable and would not have usually or ordinarily have happened. For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable where the accident is of such a nature that in the light of past experiences it can be said it was probably the result of negligence by someone and that defendant is probably the one responsible. McKinney v. Nash (1981) 120 Cal. App. 3d 428, 174 Cal. Rptr. 642.

To constitute a res ipsa loquitur situation where the question whether the accident was probably the result of negligence is not a matter of common knowledge among laymen, such as one involving the inadvertent suturing of a ureter in a hysterectomy operation, such probability must be based on expert testimony, not in any particular language, but sufficient to support an inference of negligence from the happening of the accident alone. Tomei v. Henning (1967) 67 cal. 2d 319, 62 Cal. Rptr. 9,431 P. 2d 633.

In the present matter, the expert – Dr. Brown – declared that the result of Ms. Smith’s surgery was not ordinary or usual, and that the outcome (death) was not an acceptable result. The fact that the unusual and unacceptable result can only be attributed to defendants’ actions is sufficient for an inference of negligence by the act of the surgery itself. (See Part 10 of 13.)

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

Contact Information