Recent Verdicts and Settlements (Continued from page 49)


Verdict/Settlement: $1,200,000 settle- ment


Plaintiff ’s Counsel: Jonathan Schochor (MTLA member) Schochor, Federico & Staton, Baltimore, MD; Philip C. Federico (MTLA member) Schochor, Federico & Staton, Baltimore, MD


________


Anonymous Plaintiffs v. Anonymous Defendant Physicians Circuit Court for Baltimore City


Facts: The decedent saw one of the de- fendants for complaints which included burning on urination as well as nocturia (frequent urination at night). The symp- toms lasted for five days. This defendant performed a dipstick, which indicated that there was blood in the urine. The dece- dent was given antibiotic medication, which had no affect on her symptoms. She returned to this defendant a few days later, reporting that the medication was not helping with the symptoms. In fact, the patient indicated that she was still suffering with burning on urination, noc- turia, and feeling pressure in the bladder. This defendant performed another dip- stick, which showed a large amount of blood in the urine despite the use of anti- biotics.


The defendant then diagnosed the patient with a urinary tract infection. This defendant obtained culture and began a prescription for a different antibiotic. No follow up planning was arranged and no follow up with the patient was given de- spite the fact that she had presented twice previously with blood in her urine. Subsequent to that time, the patient was later seen by another defendant physician, who took a urine sample which was re- ported back as having a significant amount of blood. This defendant failed to refer the patient to a specialist, and failed to insti- tute any treatment whatsoever. Ultimately, the following year, the de- cedent developed flank pain, nausea and vomiting. She was finally referred to a urologist who ordered appropriate tests and studies, which quickly revealed the presence of bladder cancer that had not been diagnosed or treated previously by the defendants.


Allegations of Liability: Due to the ex- tensive delay in diagnosis and treatment, the patient’s bladder cancer had progressed and metastasized, causing her to face a


50


terminal prognosis. Thereafter, the pa- tient subsequently died due to the metastatic effects of her cancer. Had the bladder cancer been timely diagnosed and treated sooner, the plaintiffs’ decedent would have been treated in the earlier stage of her disease and would not have died. Instead, she died, leaving a husband and two young children.


Plaintiff ’s Expert(s): John Lagnese, M.D. (Family Practice) Pittsburgh, PA; Albert Yu, M.D. (Family Practice) San Francisco, CA; Rodney Appell, M.D. (Urology) Cleveland, OH; Arnold Willis, M.D. (Urology) Greenbelt; Joel Palmer, M.D. (GYN Oncology) Potomac; Stephen Rosenoff, M.D. (Oncology) Roanoke, VA; Kenneth Sacks, M.D. (Oncology) Bridgeport, CT; F. Lee Tucker, M.D. (Pa- thology) Roanoke, VA; Jerome Staller, M.D. (Economics) Philadelphia, PA


Verdict/Settlement: $1,750,000 settle- ment


Plaintiff ’s Counsel: Jonathan Schochor (MTLA member) Schochor, Federico & Staton, Baltimore, MD; Philip C. Federico (MTLA member) Schochor, Federico & Staton, Baltimore, MD


________


Anonymous Plaintiffs v. Anonymous Defendant Physician Circuit Court for Baltimore County


Facts: In January of 1999, the plaintiff saw the defendant complaining that he has seen blood in his stool. Accordingly, a referral was made for a colonoscopy. However, when the new examiner per- formed a rectal examination, there was a fungating mass felt immediately on inser- tion of just the fingertip.


Allegations of Liability: In short, it is alleged that the plaintiff had a large ma- lignant, rectal mass which would have been easily discovered had this defendant acted in accordance with the standards of care and performed rectal examinations in conjunction with Hemoccult cards.


Injuries/Damages: As a direct and proxi- mate result of the negligence of this defendant in failing to perform the needed and necessary examinations, tests and studies, the cancer went from an absolute curable state to a probable incurable state. It is alleged that through time the mass was left to grow, extend and metastasize, ultimately altering the prognosis from one of a cure to an ominous prognosis.


Trial Reporter


Plaintiff ’s Expert(s): John Cello, M.D. (Gastroenterology) San Francisco, CA; Martin Poleski, M.D. (Gastroenterology) LaJolla, CA; Victor Rudkin, M.D. (In- ternal Medicine) Pittsburgh, PA; Gary Crooks, M.D. (Internal Medicine) Phila- delphia, PA; Marvin Lopez, M..D. (Oncologic Surgery) Boston, MA; Stephen Rosenoff, M.D. (Oncology) Roanoke, VA; Kenneth Sacks, M.D. (On- cology) Bridgeport, CT; F. Lee Tucker, M.D. (Pathology) Roanoke, VA; Mona Yudkoff, R.N., M.P.H. (Life Care Plan- ning) Bala Cynwyd, PA; Jerome Staller, M.D. (Economics) Philadelphia, PA


Verdict/Settlement: $850,000 settlement


Plaintiff ’s Counsel: Jonathan Schochor (MTLA member) Schochor, Federico & Staton, Baltimore, MD; Philip C. Federico (MTLA member) Schochor, Federico & Staton, Baltimore, MD


________


Doe v. Roe, et al. Circuit Court for Prince George’s County


Facts: Beginning in 1995, a forty-six year old female exhibited hyperlipidemia and hypercholesterolemia, evidenced by high low density lipoproteins (LDL), normal high density lipoproteins (HDL), and high total cholesterol.


In addition,


patient’s hypertension was not evaluated over a two-year period. Specifically, no renal, hormonal, or other studies were done to assess the diagnosis of essential hypertension. Blood pressure monitor- ing was not performed with sufficient frequency. Notwithstanding this medical history, the patient was prescribed Loestrin, an es- trogen containing oral contraceptive medication, in July 1997. It was disputed whether she actually took the drug, which is known to cause various thrombotic dis- eases such as the middle cerebral artery infarction which the patient suffered in September, 1997.


Allegations of Liability: The patient should have been diagnosed as having type 2a hyperlipidemia. This diagnosis would have required that she be treated not only with dietary and exercise measures, but also with statin medications to lower blood cholesterol. None of this treatment was carried out, and in fact the patient’s cholesterol and lipids were not measured for over a year.


(Continued on page 52) Summer 2002


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  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68