Articles Posted in Hospital Negligence

by

In a significant birth trauma injury case, the mother was given Pitocin while in delivery at the hospital. Labor was more than 14 hours. It was managed by two resident physicians and an attending physician. There were signs of uterine hyperstimulation, which was alleged to have occurred hours before the delivery and followed by hours of obvious fetal distress.

According to the report on this case, a nurse told one of the residents that the fetal monitoring signs indicated fetal distress.  However, even with this information, the physician allegedly concluded there was no fetal distress and instead increased the dose of Pitocin. The nurse reported the fetal monitoring signs of distress to her supervisor who then contacted a more senior resident and the attending physician who then stopped the administration of Pitocin.

The baby was later delivered with the assistance of forceps. At the baby’s delivery, the APGAR scores of 3 at 1 minute and 5 at 5 minutes were charted. The baby, who’s now nearing 7 years old, had suffered a brain injury from inadequate oxygen.

Continue reading

by

Daniel Cantu was 3 months old when he was brought to Walker Baptist Medical Center’s emergency room suffering from fever, crying, fussiness, tachycardia, diarrhea and other symptoms. He underwent a physical examination, a chest x-ray and a flu test, which were all reported to be negative. Daniel was diagnosed as having an upper respiratory infection and was discharged.

That same night, Daniel’s condition worsened. He was returned to the hospital the next day and was noted to have additional symptoms such as vomiting, dehydration and a sunken fontanelle as well as weight loss. Testing at the hospital revealed many abnormalities, including impaired liver function and white blood cell levels.

Pediatrician Dr. James Wilbanks examined Daniel the following day and ordered flu tests, IV fluids and Tylenol on an as-needed basis. Two days later, Daniel was discharged again. He was then brought to another pediatrician who ordered an immediate lumbar puncture. The lumbar puncture showed that Daniel was likely suffering from bacterial meningitis, a diagnosis that was later confirmed. Daniel was hospitalized for about one month and now, at the age of 6, suffers from a seizure disorder, blindness, deafness and other problems.

Continue reading

by

Baby Doe was less than two months old when she contracted respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), which caused her to stop breathing during the night. Her foster mother, Betty Cook, called the doctor’s office 4 hours later and was told to go to an emergency room. Instead, she took the baby to a clinic where she was seen by a family physician, Dr. Anne Hamilton.

During the appointment, Baby Doe stopped breathing necessitating resuscitation by Dr. Hamilton. Dr. Hamilton told Cook to drive the child to a hospital five minutes away. At the hospital,the baby was diagnosed as having suffered a hypoxic brain injury. Baby Doe is now 5 years old. She suffers from cortical blindness and is unable to walk, stand, sit, and feed herself or talk.

The Doe family filed a lawsuit against Betty Cook, the foster parent and Dr. Hamilton and the insurance fund for foster parents alleging that (1) Hamilton choose not to summon emergency care or accompany Baby Doe to the hospital; and (2) Cook choose not to timely go the hospital after she was told to do so by the doctor.

Continue reading

by

This was a medical malpractice and wrongful death case of a newborn baby. The issue on appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court was whether the defendants’ (two physicians and hospitals) motion to dismiss predicated on the plaintiff’s (the family of the newborn) failure to timely serve summonses on these defendants was justified.

The parents of the newborn baby alleged that on June 12, 2012 their son died as a result of medical malpractice at the defendant hospital and at the hands of two physicians, who were claimed to have been negligent in their care and treatment or lack of it.

The plaintiffs filed their complaints against both sets of defendants on June 20, 2014. Under the applicable code of civil procedure, the plaintiffs had 60 days to serve the defendants with summonses.  On Aug. 18, 2014, the day before the 60-day period was set to expire, plaintiffs moved for an enlargement of time for service, requesting that the court extend the deadline for service of process “for an additional sixty (60) days.”

Continue reading

by

Zofran is an anti-nausea drug.  It has been linked to serious birth defects when used during pregnancy.  In 2015, a federal panel created the special multidistrict litigation docket for victims who had been using the Zofran drug made by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).

The defendant, GSK, filed a motion in this federal district court claiming that the lawsuit was pre-empted by federal law under the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Wyeth v. Levine.  In that case, it was held that federal regulatory clearance of a medication does not shield the manufacturer from liability under state law.  The U.S. District Court in the Massachusetts district, however, denied the motion stating that the judge was “loath to dismiss” the claims without giving families a chance to develop the facts of their respective cases through discovery.

Zofran was first approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration in 1991.  It is intended to control extreme cases of nausea such as with cancer medications or following an invasive surgery.  It has not been approved for use during a pregnancy.  However, the drug Zofran has been prescribed by physicians to expectant mothers to lessen the symptoms of morning sickness.

Continue reading

by

Carol and Keith Klaine filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Frederick Dressen D.O. and Southern Illinois Medical Services d/b/a The Center for Medical Arts. In an amended complaint, the plaintiffs added a party defendant, Southern Illinois Hospital Services d/b/a St. Joseph Memorial Hospital and Memorial Hospital of Carbondale (SIHS), for negligent credentialing of Dr. Dressen.

In the discovery process, SIHS provided over 1,700 pages of documents. However, SIHS refused to provide certain documents, which it listed in a privilege log, as required by Illinois Supreme Court Rule 201(n), asserting that the withheld documents were privileged pursuant to, inter alia, the Medical Studies Act (735 ILCS 5/8-2101) and the Healthcare Professional Credentials Data Collection Act (Credentials Act) (410 ILCS 517/1 et seq.).

The plaintiff moved the court to review the SIHS excluded documents that it claimed were privileged for an in-camera review. After reviewing the documents, the circuit court judge agreed with SIHS that all of the documents were privileged, with the exception of those documents contained in “Group Exhibit B,” “Group Exhibit F” and “Group Exhibit J.”

Continue reading

by

Andrea Larkin, 25, suffered from vertigo. When tested, she was shown to have a large venous varix on the left side of her brain and an aneurysm on the right side. A varix is an enlarged vein, artery or vessel. Larkin received her medical care from Dr. Jehane Johnston. A year or so later, she stopped seeing Dr. Johnston. She became pregnant. Her prenatal care was provided by the same medical association as Dr. Johnston.

After the vaginal delivery of her child, Larkin suffered a hemorrhagic stroke. As a result, Larkin has cognitive and speech difficulties and paralysis requiring 24-hour care.

Larkin’s husband, individually and on her behalf, filed a lawsuit against Dr. Johnston and her practice, alleging that the doctor chose not to properly treat the venous varix and alert the obstetrician about Andrea’s medical history.

Continue reading

by

Iala Suarez was 24 weeks pregnant when she went to her obstetrician, Dr. Michael Coffey, for a regularly scheduled appointment. During that visit, testing showed that she had protein in her urine and high blood pressure. The next day, she went to the Peace River Medical Center, where she underwent a 24-hour urine test and a blood pressure evaluation. Suarez was discharged. The urine test results came back about 30 minutes later showing that she had preeclampsia.

Preeclampsia is a pregnancy condition considered a complication that comes with high blood pressure and signs of damage to another organ system, often the kidneys.

Over the next several days, Suarez saw Dr. Coffey during this time and went to Peace River Medical Center for an evaluation. She continued to experience high blood pressure, increased protein in her urine and restricted fetal growth. She eventually returned to the hospital where she underwent an emergency Cesarean section.

Continue reading

by

Alice Sodjago was in labor when she was admitted to a hospital. The nurse who treated her performed a vaginal exam and noted the presence of heavy meconium. The fetal monitor revealed fetal distress. The nurse contacted a midwife who did not call the on-call obstetrician. About 20 minutes later, the midwife arrived at the hospital and called the obstetrician. Sodjago’s daughter was delivered by Caesarean section almost 40 minutes later.
As a result of oxygen deprivation, the baby, now 8 years old, suffers from cognitive impairment and cortical blindness.

Sodjago and her husband, individually and on behalf of their 8-year-old daughter, filed a lawsuit against the hospital and the midwife claiming that they chose not to perform a timely emergency Caesarean section delivery, which would have saved the baby and prevented the devastating brain damage caused by the delay in delivery.

Continue reading

by

Illinois lawyers are often confused by the application of attacking motions under two distinct motion practice sections — the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, 735 ILCS §5/2-615 and §5/2-619. The case decision found in Doe v. The University of Chicago Medical Center points out the distinct differences in how a §2-619 motion to dismiss should be applied. In the well-written article in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, May 19, 2015, authored by attorney Brion W. Doherty, Mr. Doherty analyzed the Illinois Appellate Court’s decision in the Doe case, illustrating how §2-619 should be used.

In the Doe case, the plaintiff claimed to have been attacked and injured on her way to her car after working the night shift. The plaintiff had claimed that the University of Chicago Medical Center had promised her that it would it see to her safety in getting her to her car late at night. That was part of her agreement for working the night shift. The plaintiff claimed that her injuries were because the medical center had chosen not to comply with its promise to provide security at night.

In response to the complaint filed against it, the University of Chicago Medical Center filed a motion to dismiss under §2-619. It attached an affidavit by its head of security, which essentially contradicted the factual claims made by the plaintiff. The security part of the dispute was whether the plaintiff followed the hospital’s instructions on how to contact security in case of trouble.

Continue reading