74 results for 'cat:"Negligence" AND cat:"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
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
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
J. Ellender finds that the trial court properly sustained exceptions of prematurity filed by a nursing home on a family's negligence suit related to the death of their grandmother while she was a nursing home resident. In this case, the alleged failure to diagnose and provide healthcare to the grandmother falls under the definition of healthcare. If a procedure in a given case is deemed to be healthcare, it falls under Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act and must go before the medical review panel before a tort suit can proceed. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Ellender, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 55,516-CA, Categories: Civil Procedure, negligence, 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
J. Arterburn finds the trial court improperly granted summary judgment to a hospital on medical malpractice claims filed by a widow and estate administrator after her husband died following an emergency room visit. The husband died at home from coronary artery disease after the emergency room doctor diagnosed and treated him for a head injury incurred at work. The court improperly denied the wife's motion to compel and granted the hospital’s motion for a protective order. Though the court correctly received the doctor's affidavit, it improperly declined to receive the wife's expert's affidavit stating the hospital violated standards of care involving the husband's history of heart disease. Reversed in part.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Arterburn , Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: A-23-339, Categories: negligence, Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Thyer finds the trial court properly found for a surgeon on a spinal fusion patient's action, filed after she experienced complications that resulted in the surgeon removing a screw that had been pressing on a nerve. An expert testified within a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the surgeon's actions had not fallen below the standard of care and were not the proximate cause of the patient's complications. The patient has not shown a genuine issue of material fact. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Thyer , Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: CV-22-396, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Boulware denies the cardiovascular filter manufacturer's motion for summary judgment on a patient's allegations a blood clot filter was defective after she experienced a long period of complications. This resulted in the removal of the filter, but not a part that had embolized into her left lung. Though warranty breach counts are dismissed, the negligent misrepresentation claim only requires the manufacturer supplied warnings. The surgeon explained he read product warnings, noting if he had been aware of unincluded concerns, he would have selected an alternative device.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Boulware , Filed On: March 30, 2024, Case #: 2:19cv1883, NOS: Tort Product Liability - Real Property, Categories: negligence, Product Liability, medical Malpractice
J. Soto finds a lower court did not err in denying a doctor’s motion for no-evidence summary judgment after he was sued by a patient for medical negligence. The doctor argues the patient was in fact treated by a physician assistant, but he “was the only physician” in the emergency department at the time and is listed on some of the patient’s medical documents, and therefore the patient has raised a genuine dispute “as to the existence of a physician–patient relationship.”
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 08-23-00079-CV, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice, Contract
J. Steigmann finds that the lower court improperly dismissed a medical negligence suit stemming from her treatment for a severe nosebleed. During the treatment, a doctor left impacted gauze in the patient's nasal cavity causing severe pain and swelling. A genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the patient should have known by May 1, 2020 that the leftover gauze was the cause of her symptoms, which would make her complaint untimely, or if her discovery came later. Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Steigmann, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 230646, Categories: Civil Procedure, negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Taylor finds the circuit court properly denied the doctor's motions to dismiss and for summary judgment in the patient's lawsuit alleging the doctor failed to inform the patient about her recommendation to the patient's surgeon that the patient's ovaries be removed during surgery to remove part of her colon as treatment for endometriosis. The doctor's argument that she had no duty to inform the patient regarding the removal of her ovaries because she was not the surgeon who actually removed them is not enough to overcome the patient's sufficiently pleaded duty-to-inform claim, and the doctor has not made a facial case for summary judgment in terms of whether her negligence was a cause of the patient's injuries. Affirmed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Taylor, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 2023AP000255, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice
[Consolidated.] J. Land finds that the trial court properly dismissed the individual's negligence and medical malpractice action against Publix arising from injuries she suffered after she was prescribed Bactrim, a medication to which she was allergic. The individual failed to provide an expert affidavit from a pharmacist or pharmacologist despite the fact that her theory of negligence implicated Publix's exercise of professional skill and judgment in operating a pharmacy. However, the trial court incorrectly dismissed the individual's claims against the doctor. An expert affidavit provided by another doctor met the statutory requirements because it stated that a supervising doctor should have created a protocol to minimize the risk of a nurse practitioner prescribing an improper drug. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Land, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: A23A1291, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Cadish finds the county court properly ruled in favor of the surgeon in this medical malpractice suit. The patient sustained a femoral nerve injury during a hip replacement and filed this suit alleging negligence and lack of informed consent. Though the patient says that certain expert testimony containing legal fallacies should not have been allowed, a doctor stating the surgery was properly completed, and the injury happened incidentally is not a legal fallacy. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Cadish , Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 85163, Categories: negligence, Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Warhit finds that the lower court properly denied the patient's application for a new trial on the ground that the doctor improperly attempted to shift liability to defendants who had already been awarded summary judgment prior to trial. The doctor did not present evidence at trial that negligence by the dismissed defendants may have been a substantial factor in causing injuries. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Warhit, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 00887, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the surgeon in a medical malpractice suit stemming from injuries the patient sustained during a combined liposuction and hernia repair surgery. A jury reasonably found that the surgeon did not depart from the standard of care because the patient's perforated colon could have been due to preexisting condition. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 00647, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Molaison finds that the trial court should not have denied an animal hospital's motion for summary judgment on a dog owner's claim that the dog was misdiagnosed. In this case, the dog owner's expert did not meet the statutory criteria because she did not graduate from an accredited school of veterinary medicine, was not licensed to practice veterinary medicine, and was not practicing veterinary medicine. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Molaison , Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 23-C-510, Categories: negligence, Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Bourliot finds that the trial court properly denied the healthcare parties' motion to dismiss a patient's medical malpractice suit over an alleged unnecessary surgery by a podiatrist to address her bunion. The patient's amended expert report was sufficient to meet statutory requirements as to applicable standards of care, the doctor's alleged breaches and the cause of the patient's injuries. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Bourliot, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00874-CV, Categories: negligence, Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Cote partially grants the fertility clinic's motion to dismiss claims stemming from the loss of a woman's frozen eggs. All the woman's claims sound in ordinary negligence rather than medical malpractice, so the malpractice claim must be dismissed. Further, there is no evidence that the clinic made knowingly false statements about the quality of its services, so her fraud claims are also dismissed.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Cote, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv4503, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Fraud, negligence, medical Malpractice
J. Hecht finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled against a doctor in a negligence case filed by a patient who was treated for a rattlesnake bite. The patient argues that the doctor acted negligently by not immediately treating the patient with antivenom, allegedly causing lasting pain. A physician may be held liable if they are found to have acted with "willful and wanton negligence," but the patient failed to present any evidence showing the doctor acted in such a way. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Hecht, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 22-0835, Categories: negligence, medical Malpractice