417 results for 'cat:"Medical Malpractice"'.
J. Fitzwater finds that a patient, who claimed that a veterans’ medical center failed to notify him about aspects of his heart and lung conditions and failed to take proper steps to care for aspects of his condition, has not provide sufficient evidence to prove his claims. The patient did not provide evidence that notification would have changed his health outcome and the overall body of evidence indicates that the treatment he received either did not fall below the standard of care or was not shown to have a connection to an adverse outcome.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Fitzwater, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv982, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Health Care, Tort, medical Malpractice
J. Smith finds that the trial court properly ruled against a doctor's motion to dismiss a negligence case filed against her by the mother of a child who committed suicide a day after being discharged from the doctor's care. On appeal, the doctor argues that she is entitled to dismissal of the case because the mother's expert report "lacks any evidence" to show that the care she provided was negligent and subsequently led to the suicide. The expert report provides a sufficient summary of the facts and establishes a line of causation from the doctor's care to the suicide. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Smith, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 03-22-00177-CV, Categories: Negligence, Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Bulla finds the district court improperly dismissed the professional negligence action. The spinal surgery patient experienced pain, numbness and paralysis in his left leg after surgery, filing suit more than two years after an MRI showed the presence of a hematoma. Irrefutable evidence does not support the patient was placed on inquiry notice at this time. The patient's degree of diligence was diminished while under the surgeon's care, being continually reassured his condition would improve. Reversed.
Court: Nevada Court of Appeals, Judge: Bulla , Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 86005-COA, Categories: Negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Goodman finds the lower court properly denied an anesthesiologist's motion to dismiss for failure to comply with the expert report requirements of the Texas Medical Liability Act. A mother sued the anesthesiologist, alleging negligence after administering an epidural during the birth of her son, resulting in a permanent brain injury to the child. But the mother failed to serve an amended expert report by the 30-day deadline, so the anesthesiologist entered a motion to dismiss. The lower court denied the motion, and the anesthesiologist argues it should have been granted because the lower court errantly granted the mother an extension, implying a deficiency in the expert report. The instant court agrees the extension was erroneously granted, but alone does not indicate an issue with the report, and on review finds the causation opinion in the original report to be adequate, and the expert qualified. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Goodman, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 01-23-00817-CV, Categories: Negligence, Experts, medical Malpractice
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly denied the patient's motion for leave to amend the bill of particulars in a medical malpractice claim. The patient's excuse that she only learned of the new claims after the parties' depositions is not reasonable, as the medical records should have informed her of these claims. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 02262, Categories: Evidence, medical Malpractice
J. Volk grants the government's motion for summary judgment in 27 former Beckley Veterans Medical Center patients' suits claiming they contracted infectious diseases from the uncredentialed use of acupuncture by Dr. Jonathan Yates. The 27 patients' claims are barred by res judicata since they all previously filed suits against Yates for malpractice and, prior to the government filing responsive pleadings, signed releases from any claims arising from Yates' medical negligence including those "unknown" or "unsuspected."
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Volk, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv243, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Government, Health Care, medical Malpractice
J. Schlegel finds that the trial court properly found for a medical provider on a patient's medical malpractice claim. In this case, the patient did not present expert testimony on the issue of causation on his allegation that nursing staff failed to provide prompt treatment for an infection in his
left leg, resulting in the amputation of his left leg above his knee. The patient has a complicated medical history, including years of drug addiction, and expert testimony would have to be required to show that the medical provider's deviation from the standard of care led to his amputation. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Schlegel, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 23-CA-452, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Savoie finds that the trial court improperly denied the hospital's dilatory exception of prematurity filing, which argues that the patient's lawsuit falls under the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act (LMMA), and thus a medical review panel must review it first. The trial court relied on inapplicable precedent when making its ruling, the patient's allegations require expert medical testimony about the hospital's standard of care, and the hospital performing the assessment of the patient as one at high risk of fall is within the scope of its licensed activities, which all fall under the LMMA. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Savoie, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: CA-23-434, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the Massachusetts Court of Appeals vacates portions of judgments against a woman suing her dentist for allegedly sexually harassing her — such as by telling her she had the option of working as a prostitute when she expressed that she had limited options regarding her teeth — and for assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The woman’s complaint did not fail to allege that any of the dentist’s conduct was economically motivated, because she included that her dentist snapped off one of her teeth, told her she should proceed with an $8,500 implant and lied about her money and insurance information to get her to proceed with treatment with his office. Reversed.
Court: Massachusetts Court Of Appeals, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 23-P-0319, Categories: Health Care, medical Malpractice, Assault
J. Berkenkotter finds the lower court erroneously determined a trial court may use external evidence, including the insurance coverage of a plaintiff, to determine whether a prevailing plaintiff in a medical malpractice suit is entitled to exceed the statutory damages cap of $1 million because it allows tortfeasors to benefit from collateral payments made on behalf of a victim. Therefore, the case will be remanded to the trial court to allow for proper calculation of damages based on the jury's original award. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Berkenkotter, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 2024CO22, Categories: Insurance, Damages, medical Malpractice
[Consolidated.] J. Lanzinger finds the trial court improperly granted the estate's motion to limit the hospital's cross-examination of its expert witness regarding the suspension of his medical license. The suspension was the direct result of fraudulent bookkeeping, which reflects directly on the witness's truthfulness and character and may have affected the ultimate decision of the jury. Reversed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lanzinger, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1518, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Cetrulo finds that radiologists were improperly granted summary judgment in claims contending they misread x-rays that had been requested to determine whether a needle had broken off in a patient's knee during surgery because an orthopedist who may have lacked qualifications to testify as an expert in the field of radiology had been qualified to testify concerning the radiologists themselves. Reversed in part.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cetrulo, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 2023-CA-0748-MR, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Tufte finds that the district court properly entered an amended judgment dismissing a doctor and eye institute from a matter involving a truck collision with a horse-drawn hay trailer. The collision killed one of the six passengers on the horse-drawn trailer and injured the others. The doctor determined the truck driver to be legally blind, prepared a certificate of blindness, and instructed him and his spouse that he was not to drive. A second opinion from the doctor determined that the driver was "not to drive at night and only minimally during the day, no highways.” The passengers and their families claim that the doctor and institute are liable for medical malpractice because the driver's eyesight was still below the minimum vision standards required to operate a vehicle in North Dakota. Affirmed.
Court: North Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: Tufte, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 2024ND71, Categories: Vehicle, Wrongful Death, medical Malpractice
J. Currier finds that the trial court improperly allowed plaintiff to continue medical malpractice claims contending the patient suffered a deadly allergic reaction to medication because no basis existed for the judge to direct one of the physicians to certify that he prescribed allopurinol in his capacity as a gastroenterologist because that prescription was at the heart of the "care and treatment" at issue. Reversed.
Court: New Jersey Appellate Division, Judge: Currier , Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: A-3847-22, Categories: medical Malpractice
J. Longoria finds that the lower court properly denied the doctor's dismissal motion in this health care liability lawsuit stemming from a procedure to remove a possible lipoma that allegedly resulted in an injury to the patient's liver. The doctor contends that the expert report is insufficient as to causation, but the court notes that the report "need not marshal all the plaintiff's proof necessary to establish causation at trial." Also, the expert sufficiently linked "his conclusions with the underlying facts." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Longoria, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 13-22-00504-CV, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the appellate division improperly dismissed medical malpractice claims brought after a month-old infant died at a clinic following treatment for flu-like symptoms because triable issues of fact exist concerning placement of the endotracheal tube. Reversed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 70 SSM 2, Categories: medical Malpractice
J. Shulman finds that the lower court properly found that a couple cannot sue a fertility clinic for medical malpractice for the failure to properly store their embryos. However, the couple's negligence claims are reinstated, as experts presented conflicting testimony regarding the potential impact of the cryopreservation process on the embryos. It is up for a jury to determine whether the embryos were already in poor condition when preserved, or if the clinic allowed them to degrade. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Shulman, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 02088, Categories: Health Care, Negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Sannes adopts a magistrate judge’s order in full and dismisses an unrepresented litigant’s medical malpractice and disability discrimination claims against an upstate New York health care provider. His claims for medical malpractice are not actionable under the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act, and he fails to provide any evidence that would suggest discriminatory animus on the basis of a disability. Additionally, the court reaffirms the judge’s order denying his request to make his medical records public, as it would violate the court’s standard practice.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Sannes, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 8:24cv27, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities - Other - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, Ada / Rehabilitation Act, medical Malpractice
J. Barrett finds the circuit court properly granted the hospital's motion to dismiss the medical malpractice suit. The patient argues her attorneys did not engage in unauthorized practice of law, saying the Michigan attorneys (not licensed in Arkansas) tolled the limitations period when they served the notice of intention to file. The notice was correctly found to be a nullity because the attorneys were engaged in unauthorized practice of law. The notice was also correctly found to be deficient. Furthermore, the action was filed beyond the two-year medical malpractice limitations period. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett , Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: CV-23-143, Categories: Licensing, Due Process, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly granted the patient $1.25 million in damages for emotional distress in a medical malpractice suit stemming from a doctor's recommendation she be treated with methotrexate, a drug used to terminate ectopic pregnancies, without ordering a follow-up ultrasound. This treatment required the patient to abort her baby due to the potentially devastating effects of the drug. While there is evidence to support the jury's finding of medical malpractice, resulting in a $250,000 award for pain and suffering, the $1.2 million emotional distress award is excessive. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 02080, Categories: Damages, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly granted the patient $1.25 million in damages for emotional distress in a medical malpractice suit stemming from a doctor's recommendation she be treated with methotrexate, a drug used to terminate ectopic pregnancies, without ordering a follow-up ultrasound. This treatment required the patient to abort her baby due to the potentially devastating effects of the drug. While there is evidence to support the jury's finding of medical malpractice, resulting in a $250,000 award for pain and suffering, the $1.2 million emotional distress award is excessive. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 02080, Categories: Damages, medical Malpractice
J. Garry finds that the lower court properly dismissed medical malpractice claims brought after thyroid removal surgery paralyzed a patient's left vocal cord. The surgeon failed to discuss partial removal, which he considered inadvisable, as an alternative, but he provided sufficient information for a "reasonably prudent person" to possess advised consent. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Garry, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 535660, Categories: medical Malpractice
J. Aoyagi finds the trial court erred in finding defendants’ status as medical or pharmaceutical providers insulated them from the general obligation to avoid creating foreseeable risks of physical harm to others. “Defendants allegedly breached their statutory standards of care to their patient.” Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Aoyagi, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: A176439, Categories: Negligence, medical Malpractice