Articles Posted in Surgical Errors

Published on:

The Long Island plaintiff is appealing an order that was made in the Supreme Court of Orange County that granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint.

Case Background

The plaintiff alleges that the defendant committed dental malpractice by cutting out tooth number 21 from her mouth and performing negligent bridge work. She further alleges that when she complained about pain, the defendant realized that he had committed malpractice and rather than disclose it he tried to conceal it by stating that the tooth just needed to be bonded and he performed the bonding. This occurred in November of 2003.

Continue reading

Published on:

This is an instant action brought forth by the plaintiff for herself, her deceased husband, and her four children. The case involves personal injury claims that arise from a car accident and medical malpractice claims in regard to the treatment that her husband received at the defendant hospital for the injuries that he sustained during the car accident.

Prior to this action the Bronx driver of the other vehicle that was involved in the accident began this own action for personal injuries that he sustained during the accident.

The plaintiffs have moved to consolidate both actions for a joint trial. The defendants in the second action have opposed stating that consolidating the actions will result in undue prejudice and jury confusion. In addition, the defendants in the second action have moved to sever the causes of action that pertain to the car accident and those actions that pertain to the medical malpractice action. The defendant is also seeking to have the venue moved to Albany County where the treatment was provided.

Continue reading

Published on:

On 19 October 1970, a doctor performed a surgical excision of a node from plaintiff’s neck. Allegedly, during the operation on plaintiff’s neck, the surgeon negligently injured a spinal-accessory nerve in her neck and also injured branches of her cervical plexus. Following the operation, plaintiff told her surgeon that she was experiencing numbness in the right side of her face and neck and that it was difficult and painful for her to raise her right arm. The physician was allegedly aware of the negligent manner in which he had performed the surgery and, as a result, plaintiff suffered a potentially permanent personal injury; that the physician willfully, falsely and fraudulently told plaintiff that her post-operative problems, pain and difficulties were transient and that they would disappear if she would continue a regimen of physiotherapy which he had prescribed and which was then being given by another doctor. Consequently, plaintiff continued with the physiotherapy prescribed by the subject doctor until October 1974. Meanwhile, she had moved to Syracuse, New York, where she sought further medical advice. In January 1974, she was first apprised by the Syracuse physician of the true nature of her injury and that it probably had been caused at the time of her surgery. This doctor’s diagnosis was substantially confirmed in October 1974 by a professor of medicine, specializing in neurology, at Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse, who also advised that reanastomosis of the sectioned nerve four years after the surgery would not be a physiologically successful procedure. Allegedly, the doctor who performed the surgery on plaintiff had intentionally withheld information as to the true nature and source of her injury, thus, she was deprived of the opportunity for a cure of her condition.

Sometime in April 1976, the present personal injury action against the surgical doctor was commenced. Prior to service of an answer, the doctor moved to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211 on the ground that the cause or causes of action alleged were barred by the Statute of Limitations. Plaintiff then cross-moved for leave to amend her complaint to include a cause of action for malpractice.

The Supreme Court in Westchester denied defendant’s motion to dismiss and granted the plaintiff leave to amend her complaint, as requested. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed, granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the complaint. Plaintiff thereupon appealed the said decision.

Continue reading

Published on:

Two teenagers underwent heart treatment when they were young children. As a direct result of this treatment they suffered from brain damage. Both of these teenagers were treated at hospitals in Bristol.

These teenagers have been awarded half a million pounds each to compensate for medical negligence. The money was awarded as a settlement from the Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust in the United Kingdom. The report noted that the money is awarded to help deal with ongoing medical expenses, and prior suffering and treatment expenses.

The standard of surgery conducted by a pediatric cardiac unit in Bristol was called into question almost ten years ago. A public enquiry was conducted to look specifically at the risks. The report found some startling results. The Lawyer has obtained a copy of the public enquiry report which shows just how serious the scandal really was.

Continue reading

Published on:

A female patient recently underwent surgery to treat carpal tunnel syndrome. She had been suffering from this condition for years along with hypothyroidism, hypertension and diabetes. Before the surgery was due to start a nurse gave the patient a full checkup and put an IV line into the arm of the patient. The physician requested 5% dextrose, with 40mEq of potassium chloride; the infusion was started while the patient was waiting for the surgery to start.

The Nassau patient was due to undergo surgery shortly after the infusion started. However, as the first operation was more complicated than thought her surgery was delayed. This meant that the patient needed to wait longer than four hours before the surgery started. Around two hours after the IV line was started, the nurse noticed blisters around the infusion site. After surgery these blisters remained and caused necrosis which lead to painful scars.

According to the case details obtained by the Lawyer, the patient thinks that the problems were caused because the catheter was not inserted correctly. This meant that her arm developed eschars which became very painful.

Continue reading

Published on:

The Ohio Supreme Court heard arguments recently in a medical malpractice case involving the University of Toledo – College of Medicine and the issue of state employee immunity from litigation. The court’s decision in this case will have significant implications for certain medical negligence plaintiffs.

In this case, the court must decide if a surgeon who was treating his own patient is immune from a medical malpractice lawsuit because a student was observing the procedure. The plaintiff in the case alleges that the surgeon made mistakes during two vasectomy procedures which caused pain, additional medical bills, lost wages, and emotional distress. The surgeon claims immunity under Section 9.86 of the Ohio Revised Code. His legal team argues that the plaintiff can only seek damages from the University of Toledo’s medical school, claims an

attorney.

Continue reading

Published on:

A surgeon is being sued for medical malpractice after errors during two separate surgeries. The patient claims that errors made during the procedures caused unnecessary pain and suffering along with economic damages including lost wages and additional medical bills. The surgeon’s case relies on the fact that he is exempt from liability because he was teaching at the time, explains a Lawyer.

At the time of the medical errors, the surgeon was being watched by a medical student. The doctor did receive compensation for the procedures. The debate in Westchester resolves around whether the doctor’s activities were classified as volunteer activities, even though he was paid for his time, which would exempt him from personal liability and only allowed the patient to seek monetary damages from the medical school. The determination of liability in this case has wide implications for doctors and medical schools nationwide.

A judgment against the Bronx doctor in this case could result in higher medical malpractice rates for all doctors, while a judgment against the medical school could increase the costs of training future doctors. At this point, there is little question that errors occurred in the performance of the procedures, states a doctor. The second surgery was performed because of errors during the first procedures – further errors during the procedure resulted in permanent physical disfigurement.

Continue reading

Published on:

According to parents of a four-year-old, doctors were supposed to operate on their son’s right eye. The surgery was supposed to stop the boy’s eye from wandering. His parents report that that not what happened.

According to the parents, his eye surgeon first mistakenly operated on his left eye. When she realized her mistake, she then repeated the same procedure on his right eye – the correct one. As their son recovers from this medical mistake, they are concerned that they are observing more problems with the boy’s vision than they did before the surgery.

The mother of the young boy says to a Lawyer that she has not noticed any improvement in the right eye. She says she might even be seeing the left eye now wandering – when it didn’t before the mistaken surgery. She is worried about what the unnecessary surgery has done to his vision and what it could do in the future.

Continue reading

Published on:

At the hands of allegedly negligent surgical staff, a newlywed 46-year-old woman suffered brain damage in a surgery that she underwent for illness shortly after returning home from her honeymoon.

Last week, the court heard how the 46-year-old Wyattville Park resident had been a “bubbly and vivacious” receptionist, but how after her injury she needs almost 24-hour care. A rep said that the woman is a completely different person.

The woman’s husband, the chief executive of Phonographic Performance Ireland and the director general of the Irish Music Rights Organization, is suing on his wife’s behalf. At the root of the suit are the allegations that the HSE and the consultant surgeon, who works as St. Michael’s Hospital where the operation was carried out, were negligent and breached their duty the patient.

Continue reading

Published on:

The University of Southern California (USC) claims they have corrected what they term a flaw in the system that allowed a group of surgeons to transplant a kidney into the wrong patient last January. The wrong transplant occurred when the wrong organ ID wound up on the wrong paperwork. Once that mistakewas made, surgeons were essentially given the okay to proceed with the transplant.

One of the things that a rep has learned is that this ‘rare’ occurrence is not unique to USC. There are similar procedures in use at other transplant centers across the country. The ‘rare’ event started as two kidneys arrived at USC for transplant on the same day. The USC University Hospital performs two transplants a week at the most. Another contributing factor to this rarity is that both kidneys were for the left side, and both kidneys were for someone with type O blood.

Normally, the nurse is to record the operating room booking slip, which includes the organ donor ID number. On this occasion, no number had been recorded. At this point, the nurse is supposed to transfer the number from the operating room booking slip to a blood verification form. This was to serve as a final verification that the blood types and correct organ are matched. Sources have said that since there was no organ donor ID number on the booking slip, the nurse got the number from the box that contained the kidney. The problem is that was the wrong kidney.

Continue reading

Contact Information