$______ VERDICT - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE - MISMANAGEMENT OF POSTPARTUM BLEEDING - HEMORRHAGE - EMERGENCY HYSTERECTOMY REQUIRED - INABILITY TO CONCEIVE FUTURE CHILDREN.

• Pages: 5-6

On December 8, 2010, the female plaintiff presented

to the defendants with a palpable mass in her right

breast. A mammogram had been performed in June

of 2010 and was interpreted as negative, BRIADS cat-

egory 1. The plaintiff returned to the defendants a

week later, on December 14, 2010, and the mass

was again palpated and noted. The defendants di-

agnosed the mass as a cyst. The plaintiff presented

to the defendants in February of 2011 and com-

plained of the right palpable mass. A June 2011

mammogram was interpreted as negative with a

BRIADS category of 1.

The plaintiff saw the defendants yearly and continued

to undergo yearly mammograms. In July of 2015, the

plaintiff had mammography done at the defendant

hospital which revealed an area of distortion in her

right breast and nodular density. A few days later an-

other mammography was performed, along with an

ultrasound and reported with suspicious findings. A bi-

opsy was ordered. On July 29, 2015, the plaintiff was

diagnosed with ductal carcinoma, grade IIa. She un-

derwent a bilateral mastectomy with breast recon-

struction. She has undergone chemotherapy.

The plaintiff maintained that the defendants were

negligent in failing to properly and or timely provide

breast examinations of the plaintiff, failing to properly

and or timely document breast examinations of the

plaintiff, failing to refer the plaintiff for further breast

imaging including repeat mammography, ultra-

sound, MRI and or other imaging, failing to refer the

plaintiff to a breast cancer specialist, failing to timely

diagnosis a breast lump or mass and failing to timely

diagnose and treat breast cancer. As a result, the

plaintiff has suffered past and future surgeries, in-

crease risk of pain and injury, anxiety and agitation,

past and future depression, invasive and painful pro-

cedures and treatments, fatigue, hospitalizations and

decrease in life expectancy. The defense denied all

allegations of negligence and maintained that the

plaintiff did not complain repeatedly of a breast

lump and medical records show no documentation

of such complaints.

The jury entered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff total-

ing $2,243,104. The jury specifically awarded dam-

ages of $897,241.60 against defendant, Stephen

Cowen; $897,241.60 against defendant Robert

Biggans and $448,620.80 against defendant Cowen

& Biggans Medical Associates.

REFERENCE

Josette and Ronald Springer vs. Stephen Cowen,

M.D. Robert P. Biggans, M.D. and Cowen & Biggans

Medical Associates. Case no. 170701032; Judge Mi-

chael Erdos, 08-05-22.

Attorney for plaintiff: Leon Aussprung of Law Office

of Leon Aussprung, M.D., LLC in Philadelphia, PA.

Attorney for defendant: George Knoell, III of Kane,

Pugh, Knoell, Troy & Kramer, L.L.P. in Norristown,

PA.

COMMENTARY

The main argument in this medical malpractice action pertained to

a lack of documentation of the plaintiff’s complaints of the right

breast mass which the defense argued proves that she did not com-

plain of the lump repeatedly and the plaintiff maintained that

there was an error in record keeping by the various doctors of the

defendant practice. The plaintiff argued that she repeatedly told

various health practitioners at the defendant practice about her

palpable mass in the right breast. The defense argued that they

only knew about the initial complaint of the mass and not repeated

complaints.

The case then hinged on a he said/she said situation. What likely

turned the jury in the plaintiff’s favor were detailed records kept by

the plaintiff’s ob/gyn that showed that in 2014 the plaintiff re-

ported to her ob/gyn that her primary care physicians were aware

of her breast lesion and diagnosed it as a cyst. In addition, the re-

cords that the defendants did keep did not show that the defen-

dants inquired regularly about the plaintiff’s breast health and all

documentation in the record was sparse.

$1,000,000 VERDICT – MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE –

MISMANAGEMENT OF POSTPARTUM BLEEDING – HEMORRHAGE – EMERGENCY

HYSTERECTOMY REQUIRED – INABILITY TO CONCEIVE FUTURE CHILDREN.

Palm Beach County, FL

This medical malpractice case was tried against

the defendant hospital on behalf of the plaintiff

mother and her husband who alleged negligence

in treating and monitoring the mother’s post-

delivery condition. The plaintiffs claimed that the

defendant’s nurses mismanaged postpartum

bleeding, resulting in the necessity for an

emergency hysterectomy. The defendant denied

that it was negligent or that it caused harm to the

plaintiff. Several other defendants, including the

obstetrician involved, settled or were dismissed

from the case prior to trial.

The plaintiff mother’s infant boy was delivered at the

defendant hospital without incident on May 7, 2019.

The plaintiff contended that the defendant’s nurses

did not properly manage post-delivery bleeding and

failed to timely alert the treating obstetrician. By the

time a physician was called, approximately an hour

after the onset of bleeding, the plaintiff faced a

medical emergency. An emergency partial hysterec-

tomy was performed, which precludes the plaintiff

from conceiving additional children. The plaintiff

mother, age 34 at the time in question, testified that

she did not consent to the hysterectomy and had

planned to have a third child.

SUMMARIES WITH TRIAL ANALYSIS 5

National Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

Subscribe Now