423 results for 'cat:"Medical Malpractice"'.
J. Kyzar finds that the trial court properly dismissed a patient's claim against the surgery center over the alleged failure to investigate domestic abuse by a doctor who performed surgeries on her. The patient's "administrative negligence" claim falls under the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act and was prescribed since it was filed over three years after the alleged malpractice. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Kyzar, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: CA-23-682, Categories: Civil Procedure, medical Malpractice
J. Reidinger denies a man, who was involuntarily committed to a hospital in 2016, his motion for reconsideration after he previously filed two other civil actions that were denied. The man then filed a motion to reverse the denials, but these were time-barred. The present motion for reconsideration is therefore futile.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Reidinger, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv305, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Civil Procedure, Constitution, 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. Mikva finds that the lower court properly denied the hospital's motion to transfer venue in this medical malpractice case. While the patient lives in Will County, substantial deference is due to his choice of forum in Cook County where he received extensive inpatient and outpatient care. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Mikva, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 231120, Categories: Venue, medical Malpractice
J. Nardacci denies in part a motion for summary judgment in a wrongful death medical malpractice suit against a federally funded healthcare provider, finding the family estate’s expert witness, a cardiologist, is qualified to provide testimony regarding the decedent’s cause of death. The decedent died from a heart attack brought on by a rare heart condition shortly after he was taken off Clozaril, a medication to treat his mental health condition. However, three of the four healthcare personnel named in the suit are dismissed due to a lack of expert testimony implicating them in decedent’s death.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Nardacci, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv574, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Experts, Wrongful Death, 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. Nardacci grants summary judgment to a nursing home facility on a late father’s estate’s negligence and substantive due process claims stemming from the man’s death while under the facility’s care and supervision, but preserves its claims for medical malpractice and federal and state public health law violations for trial. The court rejects the nursing home’s contentions that there is no private right of action against nursing homes under the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act or that it cannot be held liable for the decedent’s injuries.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Nardacci, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 1:19cv604, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Tort, Due Process, medical Malpractice
Per curium, the court finds that the district court correctly denied a motion to remand to state court and a motion to amend complaint made by parents who sought damages related to alleged negligent prenatal care. The United States stands in as defendant for health care employees that are federally funded under the Federal Tort Claims Act and the case was removed to federal court. The services provided to the parents were part of a federal grant program and are under federal court jurisdiction. The parents’ motion to amend the defendants listed on the complaint will not impact federal court jurisdiction as the motion indicates. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 23-3357, Categories: Jurisdiction, medical Malpractice
J. Gravois finds that the trial court properly determined that a patient's request for a medical review panel was prescribed on its face. The evidence shows that the patient had an x-ray in November 2019 that revealed she had healing fractured ribs, and that she should have been on notice as to the potential malpractice at that date. Since the patient did not file her request for a medical review panel within one year of November 2019, her complaint was untimely and prescribed. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Gravois, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 23-CA-347, Categories: Civil Procedure, Evidence, 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. Wilson finds that the trial court properly sustained the exception of no right of action in the estate's breach of contract claim involving the lack of insurance provided to a doctor who was sued for medical malpractice by the decedent's husband, who won a $2.8 million judgment but has yet to collect on it. The husband has no right of action since he was not a third-party beneficiary to the contract between the doctor and physicians group. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: CA-23-527, Categories: medical Malpractice, Contract
J. Wood finds the county court improperly found for a healthcare company on a doctor's contract claims. The emergency room physician was terminated from the independent contractor agreement after complaints led to findings of his use of nonstandard diagnostics, a lack of candor and having unprofessional interpersonal skills. The court improperly included hearsay statements made by another doctor regarding the physician's not being placed on the work schedule. There is no other admissible evidence in the record that a particular hospital would not allow the physician to work at its locations. Reversed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wood , Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: CV-22-745, Categories: Health Care, medical Malpractice, Contract
J. Windhorst finds that the trial court properly found for a dentist on a patient's medical malpractice claim alleging the dentist punctured his tongue while administering local anesthesia. In this case, the patient waited until the dentist filed a motion for summary judgment to retain an expert but failed to provide competent summary judgment evidence in opposition to the dentist’s motion. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Windhorst, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 23-CA-380, Categories: Evidence, medical Malpractice
J. Davis denies the government's motion for summary judgment in the deceased Vietnam veteran's wife's medical-malpractice suit on her husband's behalf, and denies the wife's motion for leave to file a motion to strike the government's expert physicians' surrebuttal declarations. The wife has exhausted her administrative remedies, since the Veteran's Administration took nearly two years to issue a decision on her claim, and did so after this litigation began. Additionally, questions of fact remain as to whether the wife can establish that the Veterans Administration's failure to dialyze the veteran led to his cardiac arrest. Finally, a prior order in this case did not bar admission of the expert surrebuttals.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Davis, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 0:21cv1431, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
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
Per curiam, the circuit finds the district court properly awarded summary judgment to the medical device manufacturer. The surgeon placed the device on the patient's spine to repair the membrane protecting the spinal cord. After a second surgery to find the origin of the patient's ensuing headaches, the surgeon discovered the device had disintegrated. The patient has not identified any specific way in which the product deviated from its design. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 23-50274, Categories: Product Liability, medical Malpractice
J. Norton grants the cancer patient's motion for reconsideration. The court awarded summary judgment to the military doctor and government as to the patient's claims the doctor forged his signature on a form consenting to having his prostatectomy performed by a less-skilled surgeon. The patient incurred complications after surgery requiring further medical intervention. A motion in limine has been filed requesting to name a handwriting expert as a witness, and the government has also submitted new evidence. The evidence now is meaningfully different from that before the court on the motions for summary judgment.
Court: USDC South Carolina Aiken, Judge: Norton, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv3801, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, Government, 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
J. Thierry finds that the trial court properly dismissed the hospital patient's medical malpractice claim over a severe pressure ulcer she developed while in a medically induced coma. The alleged malpractice happened during the Covid-19 pandemic, and the patient failed to meet the "heightened burden" of the state's Health Emergency Powers Act by proving gross negligence or willful misconduct had occurred. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Thierry, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: CA-23-562, Categories: Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Wheelock affirms the district court's grant of summary judgment to the employer on cross-claims seeking indemnification for any judgment or settlement arising out of a medical-malpractice and negligence suit brought by a third party to this appeal who claimed that the employee injured his neck while performing a therapeutic massage. The An employer's common-law right of indemnification from an employee is not abrogated by a Minnesota law requiring indemnification because a different statute controls when employees are sued by reason of their employment relationship. Additionally, the employee has already been indemnified by an insurer, effectively negating any responsibility the employer had to indemnify her. . Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wheelock, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: A23-0495, Categories: Employment, Indemnification, medical Malpractice
J. Doyle finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the doctors in a medical malpractice action brought by the parents arising from their mentally ill son's accidental drowning death after he was discharged to them from the doctors' care. The son ran away after being discharged and was found dead in a lake three days later. The son's drowning some time after his discharge is too remote to be the proximate result of his discharge. There is no evidence that the son was unsafe to walk on his own and no evidence explaining what caused him to drown. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Doyle, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: A23A1715, Categories: medical Malpractice
J. Biery adopts a report and recommendations and dismisses, with prejudice, a medical malpractice suit brought against an Army hospital under the Federal Torts Claim Act because the pro se patient has failed to timely respond to court motions and did not properly serve the Army hospital despite an order from a judge explaining how to do so.
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Biery, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv307, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Government, Tort, medical Malpractice
J. Dimke dismisses the family member's complaint alleging that the hospital and others prescribed pain medication to the decedent, contributing to her addiction and her eventual death from “the toxic effects of multiple drugs.” The family member does not establish a proper basis for this court to exercise personal jurisdiction over the hospital, because although the hospital and others transmitted prescriptions to Washington pharmacies, the family member does not cite any authority supporting their argument that a prescription transmission to an out-of-state pharmacy at the patient's request is enough to show a purposeful direction.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Washington, Judge: Dimke, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv31, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Jurisdiction, medical Malpractice
[Consolidated] J. Stiglich finds the district court improperly awarded the estate more than $48 million in compensatory and punitive damages. The estate filed a negligence and malpractice suit after the family member died under care at the medical center during a sickle cell crisis. Though attorney fees were properly awarded, hospitals do not owe a fiduciary duty to their patients in connection with medical treatment. Because the breach of fiduciary duty claim fails, the award for punitive damages is reversed. Reversed in part.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Stiglich , Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 79658, Categories: Damages, Fiduciary Duty, medical Malpractice
J. Keough finds the trial court properly granted the doctor's motion in limine to exclude questions regarding whether his hospital privileges had been revoked at any point during his medical career. The possibility of prejudice or jury confusion outweighed any probative value related to the standard of care he provided to the patient. The patient was able to provide expert testimony throughout the trial and also questioned the doctor about why he decided to stop delivering babies, all of which was sufficient to create an inference that his failure to properly deliver the patient's baby was based on a breach of the standard of care. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Keough, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-960, Categories: Evidence, Experts, medical Malpractice
J. Penzalo finds the lower court properly found in favor of a doctor regarding a patient's allegations of discrimination. The patient claimed the doctor was insensitive and accusatory during the initial visit with the doctor which caused her trauma, and that he discriminated against her. The doctor argued that the claim is one of medical malpractice, requiring the patient to first pursue relief via a medical review panel; the lower court agreed and dismissed the patient’s complaint. The instant court finds no error in the lower court’s determination. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Penzato, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 2023CA0914, Categories: Damages, Jurisdiction, medical Malpractice
J. Gustafson finds that the trial court was within its discretion to deny a patient's motion to alter or amend a judgment. She failed to provide any briefing in support of the motion, which she filed in an attempt to substitute a doctor's insurance company as the real party in interest to her medical malpractice complaint. Also, bankruptcy law did not prevent the patient from serving process on the doctor, so the trial court properly dismissed her complaint for failure to serve. Affirmed.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: Gustafson, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: DA 23-0319, Categories: Bankruptcy, Civil Procedure, medical Malpractice
J. Blacklock finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of a doctor in a case brought by a patient of his who claims he released her from the hospital prematurely and is liable for damages she sustained in a fall. While the patient filed her suit within the tolling period of the statute of limitations, the form was incomplete, leading the court of appeals to find in favor of the doctor. However, an incomplete from is still viable for the tolling of the limitations period. Therefore, the patient's claims are ripe. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 22-0435, Categories: Civil Procedure, medical Malpractice