New York Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Friends explained how a man finally feels heard, after many years of complaints. His wife had committed suicide while under the care of a psychiatrist.

The man claimed he had called her psychiatrist more than eight times to explain his wife was suicidal from the antidepressants that were prescribed by the doctor. Sources confirm the doctor repeatedly ignored these phone calls.

A Lawyer said the reason the man is being heard now versus before is a legislative committee is reviewing a bill regarding medical malpractice suits that makes the process easier. This bill, he explained, will “make it more difficult for judges to dismiss these types of cases so easily.”

“The bill basically will require plaintiffs to obtain a certificate of good faith from another medical expert with similar credentials to the one involved in the case,” said another source.

“In this particular case,” he added, “The plaintiff still had trouble because the certificate was presented several years after the initial complaint.”

The proposed law will revise the 2005 statute that was meant to help courts filter out senseless malpractice cases by requiring a medical expert who works in the same field testify.
"The original intent of the statute was not such a bad thing," said a doctor. "The idea of trying to prevent frivolous medical malpractice suits from being filed is a legitimate one. But there have been so many issues that have arisen over the past five years as to how to implement it."
“Also, he said, conflicting state Supreme Court decisions have come down since the law was passed, and language that requires plaintiffs to get certificates from a ‘similar health care provider’ can be problematic.”

The 46-year-old woman who had died, reportedly backed into her garage and left her car running with the door shut. She died of carbon monoxide poisoning.

"I loved her in life," her husband said during an interview this week. "I tried to get her help. Now I'm fighting for her in death."

The plaintiff brought the lawsuit to the courts in 2006 and represented himself the entire time. He is reportedly unemployed but works as a photographer on the side. Courts in New York City and Westchester are taking note.

Continue reading "Grieving husband feels heard at last by court systems" »

This case should never have happened and the awful thing is that the woman the suffered the medical malpractice is unable to sue in the state she lives in. This would never happen in New York, indicated a NYC Medical Malpractice Lawyer
The woman knew that there was a major problem, as she had pains in her legs. She had a history of blood clots and had a filter installed in one of the main veins of her heart. She went to the hospital ER outlined her problem. She was discharged with a diagnosis of bilateral leg pain.
Three days later, her legs were bright red and she called an ambulance and was taken to a different hospital. Evidently, her filter was blocked with blood clots and because she had waited, there was dead tissue in her legs and she was starting to go into kidney failure. Several weeks later when she came out of a coma she discovered both her legs had been amputated to save her.
The woman sought help from an attorney, but in the state where she lives, even though she has a good case, it can’t be pursued due to caps on medical malpractice lawsuits. Her home state passed laws in 2003 that made it even more difficult to sue in “any” health care situation, but more particularly in an ER setting. The med mal cap was set at $250,000 for non-economic damages per health care provider, with a maximum award of $750,000.
In this woman’s case, the $750,000 would barely make a dent in her medical bills and other expenses she is facing for the rest of her life, said the New York Medical Malpractice Lawyer. While her case against the ER doctor is solid, the language in the new law protects ER doctors from misdiagnosis, unless they acted with wanton and willful negligence; a hard thing to prove. The doctor would have to “know” they were putting a patient at risk and still proceed with their diagnosis. There is no room here for simple negligence and the new threshold is virtually impossible to meet. In New York City and Long Island this defense would probably not hold up.

If you have been in a situation like this and have been misdiagnosed by an ER doctor, make your first call to a New York Medical Malpractice Attorney. Do not wait until you feel better, as the Statute of Limitations must be met in cases such as this. Only a New York Medical Malpractice Attorney will be able to obtain equitable compensation for you.

Continue reading "Leg Pain Results in Double Amputation" »

A New York medical malpractice lawyer was able to move a case forward on behalf of a woman whose doctor did not appropriately follow up after she consulted him regarding a tumor in her breast. The problem began when the woman detected a mass in her right breast during a self-exam. She consulted the defendant doctor, who both examined her and had a mammogram performed. The mammogram was inconclusive, but the exam revealed, in the words of the doctor, that there was “something there.” Specifically, the doctor realized that the tumor had grown quickly, but concluded based on the mammogram that cancer was unlikely. Nonetheless, the doctor recommended that a biopsy be performed immediately. The woman had the biopsy performed by a specialist, who called the woman’s doctor and recommended that the lump be removed. Unfortunately, this was never communicated to the woman, nor was she advised to come in for a follow-up exam. Doctors in New York City and Queens must be on the lookout for this type of situation which can turn into malpractice.
Subsequently, the woman noticed that the lump was becoming more visible and changing shape. She went back to the doctor, and had a second examination, a mammogram, and a sonogram. Based on these test, the doctor changed his mind and concluded that she “probably” had cancer. A second biopsy was performed, and this time the woman was advised that she had “invasive cancer.” Unfortunately, by this time eleven months had transpired, and the woman’s conditioned had worsened.
The court ultimately allowed a case against the doctor to go forward because of the lack of appropriate follow-up care. The court focused on the “layperson’s report” – the report that the doctor gave his patient – and noted that the report did not indicate that the lump was suspicious or possibly malignant, did not indicate that other examinations were necessary, and did not check boxes for further consultations, surgical or otherwise.

Continue reading " DOCTOR FAILED TO FOLLOW UP AFTER DETECTING A TUMOR" »