MEDICAL MALPRACTICE. $______ RECOVERY - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - DELAY IN DIAGNOSIS OF LUNG CANCER - PATIENT UNDERGOES ROUTINE CHEST X-RAY TO CLEAR HER FOR GYNECOLOGICAL SURGERY AND RADIOLOGIST, WHO NOTED SUSPICIOUS MASS IN HIS REPORT, DID NOT SO ADVISE THE PHYSICIAN WHO CLEARED THE PLAINTIFF FOR SURGERY - WRONGFUL DEATH.

• Pages: 25-26

Supplemental Verdict Digest

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

$5,000,000 CONFIDENTIAL RECOVERY - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - PARAMEDIC

NEGLIGENCE - PLAINTIFF SUFFERS PERMANENT BRAIN DAMAGE DURING

TRANSPORT BY DEFENDANT PARAMEDICS - HYPOXIC ISCHEMIC BRAIN INJURY TO

PLAINTIFF.

Withheld County, MA

In this medical malpractice matter, the 45-year-

old male plaintiff contended that as he was being

transferred from the defendant hospital’s

emergency department to a non-party trauma

center by the defendant paramedics, the

paramedics negligently failed to properly monitor

the plaintiff. Specifically, the plaintiff maintained

that the defendants failed to follow standard

procedure when it became apparent that the

plaintiff was receiving insufficient ventilation,

either due to a ventilator failure or an obstruction

to his airway. According to the plaintiff, the

defendants should have implemented standard

paramedic protocol for ventilator failure or

insufficient ventilation, which would have

included removing the patient from the ventilator

and ventilating the plaintiff manually, which the

defendants failed to do. As a result, the plaintiff

maintained that he suffered an hypoxic ischemic

brain injury causing permanent brain damage.

The defendants denied the plaintiff’s allegations

and disputed causation and damages.

The parties agreed to resolve the plaintiff’s claim for the

sum of $5,000,000 in a confidential settlement.

REFERENCE

Patient vs. Defendant Paramedics. 05-24-16.

Attorneys for plaintiff: Eric J. Parker, Susan M.

BourqueandHeatherM.CoxofParker,Scheerin

Boston, MA.

$1,000,000 RECOVERY - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - DELAY IN DIAGNOSIS OF LUNG

CANCER - PATIENT UNDERGOES ROUTINE CHEST X-RAY TO CLEAR HER FOR

GYNECOLOGICAL SURGERY AND RADIOLOGIST,WHONOTEDSUSPICIOUSMASSIN

HIS REPORT, DID NOT SO ADVISE THE PHYSICIAN WHO CLEARED THE PLAINTIFF FOR

SURGERY - WRONGFUL DEATH.

Bergen County, NJ

This was a medical malpractice action involving a

female patient, age 49 at the time of her death, in

which it was contended that the defendant

radiologist, who reviewed a routine chest x-ray

taken for the purpose of clearing the patient for

gynecological surgery involving the removal of a

non-cancerous growth, negligently failed to

convey his concern that the chest x-ray reflected a

35%-40% chance of cancer. The co-defendant ob/

gyn was not aware of this concern when she

performed the surgery. The plaintiff maintained

that when it became apparent eight months later

that the patient required additional gynecologic

surgery and was sent for another clearing chest x-

ray, the tumor was finally discovered. The plaintiff

maintained that the defendant radiologist’s report

was very confusing and did not appear to make

sense in the details, which included a reference to

the depth of the mass, which could not be gauged

because of the absence of a lateral view, and that

after receiving this report, the defendant ob/gyn

should have had additional communications with

the radiologist before performing the surgery. The

plaintiff also contended that the co-defendant

internist, who was asked to have the patient

cleared for the surgery, should have discovered

that the chest x-ray returned with suspicious

findings. The radiologist was apparently not

aware that the ob/gyn had asked the internist to

clear the patient and the x-ray report was not sent

to the internist. The plaintiff maintained that the

internist should have made greater inquiries as to

the results of the chest x-ray prior to clearing the

patient for surgery.

The defendant internist indicated that if he was advised

of the x-ray report, he would have immediately con-

tacted the radiologist and inquired as to the meaning of

Florida Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

Subscribe Now

25

The following digest is a composite of additional significant verdicts reported in full detail in our companion

publications. Copies of the full summary with analysis can be obtained by contacting our publication office.