Recent Verdicts & Settlements Edited by Mitchell A. Greenberg
Mitchell A. Greenberg, of the Greenberg Law Office in Baltimore, received his J.D. from the University of Baltimore School of Law. He is a member of MTLA’s Board of Governors and serves as Vice-Chair of MTLA’s Trial Reporter Committee. Mr. Greenberg is a member of MTLA’s Membership Committee and serves as MTLA’s delegate to the Task Force for the Rehabilitation of Injured Workers. He is a member of the Maryland State, Baltimore City, and American Bar Associations and also a member of ATLA. His practice concentrates in workers’ compensation, criminal defense, and serious personal injury.
Medical Negligence
Anonymous Plaintiff V. Anonymous Physician Circuit Court for Baltimore County
Facts: Defendant performed a bunio- nectomy without obtaining x-rays. Bunionectomy failed. Defendant then at- tempted correction by resecting scar tissue from area of first surgery causing damage to nerve. Defendant attempted nerve block in the area which caused additional nerve irritation. Defendant performed tarsal tun- nel release with no confirmation by diagnostic studies which caused additional nerve damage
Allegations of Liability: A breach in the standard of care by failing to employ the use of x-rays when considering which type of bunionectomy to perform.
The
defendant’s initial procedure was insuffi- cient to correct plaintiff’s bunion. If the first surgery did not fail,the subsequent surgeries would not have been necessary. Furthermore, defendant continued to per- form corrective surgeries without the use of diagnostic testing. Defendant also did not allow sufficient time between surger- ies in order to determine if the nerve irritation was temporary. With each sub- sequent surgery, defendant either worsened plaintiff’s condition or caused nerve irritation or damage in another area of plaintiff’s foot. Defendant contended that there was no evidence that initial sur- gery was inadequate as there was no diagnostic evidence indicating that the surgery was inadequate for plaintiff’s con- dition. Moreover, defendant contended that the standard of care did not mandate diagnostic testing before such foot surgery. Finally, defendant contended that all of plaintiff ’s conditions were caused by the development of scar tissue which is an acceptable risk of surgery.
Injuries/Damages: Need for 2 subse- quent corrective surgeries; continued numbness and pain in foot causing limp; $39,500 past medical expenses; $49,000
Summer 2000
past wage loss; $30,000 future experimen- tal surgery to relieve pain.
Plaintiff ’s Experts: Lew Schon, M.D. (Or- thopedist), Baltimore, MD; Stephen Boc, DPM (Podiatrist), Philadelphia, PA
Defense Experts: Jeffrey F. Witte, M.D. (Orthopedist), Rockville, MD; Michael L. Dvorkin, M.D., (Orthopedist), Baltimore, MD
Verdict/ Settlement: $285,000.00
Plaintiff’s Counsel: Paul J. Weber (MTLA member), Hyatt, Peters & Weber, LLP, Annapolis, MD
Defense Counsel: ANONYMOUS ________
Doe v. Roe and Roe Hospital Circuit Court for Doe County, Maryland
Facts: This is a medical malpractice case brought by the adult Plaintiffs, Doe, on behalf of their minor child, Doe. Plaintiffs allege Defendants, Dr. Roe and Roe Hos- pital, violated the standard of care in their treatment of the adult female Plaintiff for the labor and delivery of her minor child. The adult female Plaintiff entered the hos- pital for delivery of her child. During the labor, the minor Plaintiff exhibited signs and symptoms which caused concern to the agents, servants and/or employees of Roe Hospital, including the possibility of an abruption of the placenta. Despite indica- tions that the minor Plaintiff needed to be delivered immediately, Defendants failed to timely and appropriately deliver the minor Plaintiff. The minor Plaintiff after birth was diagnosed with severe asphyxia. The minor Plaintiff is brain injured, develop- mentally delayed and has mental retardation.
Allegations of Liability: Plaintiffs allege the Defendants were negligent in: failing to appropriately monitor the labor of the adult female Plaintiff, failing to recognize and appropriately handle fetal distress, and in the unnecessary delaying of a cesarean sec-
Trial Reporter
Defense Counsel: Withheld by request ________
Doe v. Roe Court/Docket: Superior Court for the Dis- trict of Columbia
Facts: This is a medical malpractice case brought by the adult Plaintiffs, Doe, on behalf of her son, Doe. Plaintiff entered the hospital for the delivery of her son. The labor and delivery records indicate that the last internal examination documenting the station of the baby was at 5:00 a.m. with the baby at 0 station. At 5:30, Plaintiff Doe was noted for the first time to be C/C (com- plete). She was taken to the delivery room at approximately 5:35, with the baby be- ing delivered at 5:41. The second stage of labor did not begin until Plaintiff Doe was C/C at approximately 5:30. Baby Doe was delivered with the use of forceps without cause or justification or reason, at which time the skull of Baby Doe was fractured by said forceps, causing a bleed in Baby Doe’s brain. Baby Doe was noted to have seizures and subsequent CAT scan showed a skull frac- ture and significant bleeding and hematoma in his brain. The Plaintiff now is no longer a minor, is in special education classes, and will need a job coach to work.
Allegations of Liability: Plaintiffs alleges Defendant, Dr. Roe, violated the standard of care in his treatment of Plaintiff for her labor and delivery of her son when Defen-
(Continued on page 44) 43
tion. Defendant Dr. Roe failed to timely come to the hospital, and once there failed to timely deliver the minor Plaintiff.
Verdict/Settlement: present cost settlement: $5 million
Plaintiff ’s Counsel: Andrew E. Greenwald (MTLA member) Joseph, Greenwald, Laake, Greenbelt, MD R. Martin Palmer, Jr. Hagerstown, MD 21740
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52