Kaiser Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Kaiser Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Arises After Man Is Misdiagnosed In Emergency Room

Mon, 09 Apr 2012 08:19:37 -0800

The following blog is provided as an example of a Kaiser medical malpractice lawsuit to aid potential clients in how a lawsuit is examined and conduced. It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Flemming sustained permanent brain damage as a result of an ischemic stroke. He suffers from cognitive impairment and was unable to return to his employment because of an inability to perform complex calculations or to multi-task. He experiences memory loss and confusion and claimed that he is limited in terms of employment options.

Facts:
On March 18, 2008, plaintiff Blain Flemming, 33, a project manager for an electrical subcontractor, suffered an ischemic left-sided stroke with left inferior frontoparietal lobe, occipital lobe and cerebellar infarcts. Flemming was unable to speak clearly, had difficulty walking, had a major headache and showed other symptoms of a stroke. Flemming was taken by ambulance to Kaiser, arriving within one hour of symptom onset. Kaiser's employees diagnosed Flemming with food poisoning. Although he could not walk or talk coherently, Flemming was discharged from the hospital.

Flemming claimed Kaiser's emergency room physicians failed to perform a proper neurologic work-up for his stroke, failed to obtain a consult from a neurologist and failed to administer tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), a known clot-busting drug. Flemming alleged that administration of the drug would have resolved his stroke symptoms.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Kaiser Sued After Man Suffers From Herniated Disc Post Surgery, Part 2 of 2

Mon, 02 Apr 2012 08:18:32 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

He argued that regardless of whether the surgical resident met the standard of care, something “negligent” must have occurred during the hemorrhoidectomy surgery that caused his herniated disc. He asserted liability based on claims of professional negligence and the legal doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.

The respondents contended that the surgical resident met the standard of care during the performance of the April 5 banding procedure. They further contended that the surgeon and the operating room staff involved with the April 13 hemorrhoidectomy complied with the standard of care and that Rory did not suffer a herniated disc during that surgery. They contended that even if Rory suffered a herniated disc during the hemorrhoidectomy surgery, it was not due to any negligence on the part any of the operating room staff.

Rory was treated with physical therapy, epidural spinal injections and other conservative treatment. He was referred to a neurosurgeon and underwent spine surgery in December 2006. Rory initially showed some improvement but then relapsed and was ultimately diagnosed with failed back surgery syndrome. He never returned to work and claimed that he has been unable to perform any strenuous physical activity.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Man Makes Kaiser Medical Malpractice Claim After Herniated Disc Arises After Surgery, Part 1 of 2

Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:17:33 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Rory claimed that the surgical resident performed the banding procedure negligently, causing him excruciating pain. During a hemorrhoidectomy April 13, Rory was placed in lithotomy position, which was lying on his back with his legs elevated in candy cane stirrups. Following the surgery, he claimed that he immediately felt pain in his left leg, hip and buttock. He was ultimately diagnosed with a herniated disc at L5-S1.

Facts:
On April 5, 2006, plaintiff Herman Rory, 35, a master diesel mechanic, underwent a hemorrhoidbanding procedure at Kaiser Permanente. The procedure was performed by a third-year surgery resident.

Rory underwent a surgical hemorrhoidectomy April 13. During the hemorrhoidectomy, he was placed in lithotomy position, which was lying on his back with his legs elevated in candy cane stirrups. Following the surgery, Rory claimed that he immediately felt pain in his left leg, hip and buttock. He was ultimately diagnosed with a herniated disc at L5-S1.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Man Has A Fatal Heart Attack Following Over-Dosage of Medication in Kaiser Medical Malpractice Suit

Mon, 19 Mar 2012 08:16:09 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS
According to Plaintiff: Decedent Van Ferry, age 59, a facilities manager and husband to Danielle Ferry, a 58-year-old homemaker, father to Kathy Ferry, age 30, Alex Ferry, age 29, Vanessa Ferry, age 27, and Marry Ferry, age 26, and grandfather to Natalia Ferry, age 9, was diagnosed with Graves disease in 1991. He underwent radiation iodine treatment, killing much of his thyroid gland. As a consequence, decedent became hypothyroid (insufficient production of thyroid hormone) and was started on synthetic thyroid replacement therapy. After several years of taking oral thyroid tablets and having lost health insurance, decedent stopped filling the prescriptions for the Synthroid.

In April 2009, after becoming a new member of defendant Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, decedent was seen by a new primary care physician who referred him to endocrinologist Dr. Valerie Names with Kaiser. Dr. Names examined decedent, obtained a medical history, and prescribed 200 mcg of Levothroid to be taken on a daily basis, with a return office visit scheduled for 33 days later on May 18, 2009. Decedent returned to Dr. Names on May 18, 2009, at which time he informed her that during the previous week he had been suffering “worsening chest pain and pressure.” He had lost 11 lbs, his heart rate was elevated from 72 to 97, his cholesterol was measured at 302, and he smoked a pack of cigarettes per day. Dr. Names ordered blood tests, which were returned the following day, May 19, 2009, after which she contacted decedent and reduced his prescription from 200 mcg per day to 137 mcg per day. During the very early hours of the following morning, decedent died of a massive heart attack.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Man Suffers Stroke In Medical Malpractice Case Against Kaiser Sacramento

Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:57:54 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

SYNOPSIS: Plaintiff Herman was 65 years old at time of incident, Caucasian, retired high school principal. His wife Jill, was also 65 years of age. Herman was a long-time patient of Kaiser Permanente Hospital, who had undergone carotid endarterectomy in 1988 on the right internal carotid artery. At the time of the procedure, a dye study had shown he had a severe narrowing estimated between 95% and 99% on the left internal carotid artery. However, Kaiser elected not to repair the stenosis on the left internal carotid artery and decided, instead, to await symptoms developing. Thereupon, Plaintiff was seen monthly from June, 1988 through May, 1989.

Kaiser claimed none of the symptoms Mr. Marriot was suffering; namely, dizziness, lightheadedness and staggering were specifically related to the left internal carotid stenotic lesion. On May 8, 1989, Plaintiff presented to the clinic to his cardiologist, Dr. Andy Berry, complaining of staggering episodes over the last 10 days. Dr. Berry felt he should be seen in a neurological follow-up. Plaintiff also indicated he was planning to go fishing in the mountains and was given permission by his physician to go. Subsequently, on May 29, 1989, Mr. Marriot suffered loss of speech which is felt to be related to the left internal carotid artery.

Plaintiff was seen at a clinic in Sacramento, CA, but the clinic refused to hospitalize him. He was then transported by his wife to Kaiser Permanente at which time he was diagnosed as having suffered a stroke, most probably related to a complete occlusion of the left internal carotid artery.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Kaiser Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Results From Man Suffering Aneurysm Wrong Diagnosis, Part 3 of 3

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 07:56:51 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants breached the standard of care by failing to treat John Doe as an individual patient and instead focused only on his Grade 5 status. Satals failed to recognize that the aneurysm and not the AVM had bled, thus leaving John Doe at high risk for re-bleed. The appropriate treatment was to clip the aneurysm. Moreover, respondents sent John Doe to the Protector with an unclipped aneurysm, which one expert neurologist called a ‘ticking time bomb.‘ The risks of catastrophe were great. Nevertheless, respondents failed to provide appropriate follow-up neurological and diagnostic care at the Protector, essentially letting nature take its course. The inevitable happened and John Doe's aneurysm re-bled. Before the second bleed, John Doe was making remarkable progress. According to plaintiffs' experts, it is likely he would have recovered to the point where he could have returned to work. He may have had some difficulty walking but would not have the severe ataxia he has now. He would not require the tracheostomy. He would not require 24-hour care. His cognitive functions remain intact; however, he cannot speak because of the trach. He communicates using an alphabet board and sign language. He has lost tongue control as well as his swallowing ability due to the second bleed.

Defendants denied all of plaintiffs' allegations and contended that they acted within the standard of care by not clipping plaintiff patient's aneurysm. As a Grade 5, plaintiff was at increased risk of death or serious injury from surgery to clip the aneurysm. Defendants also contended that they appropriately monitored plaintiff patient at the Protector by having him examined by Kaiser internist Taimes and scheduling him for a follow-up neurosurgical examination four weeks after admission to the Protector. Defendants denied that the second bleed caused plaintiff any significant injuries and that his present disabilities were caused by the first bleed.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Sacramento Medical Malpractice Case Against Kaiser Results After Misdiagnosis, Part 2 of 3

Thu, 23 Feb 2012 07:55:50 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

On September 10, 1999 Satals performed a craniotomy to remove four ccs of blood in the cerebellar pontine angle and also placed a tracheostomy. Despite placing the patient under general anesthesia and drilling holes in his skull, Satals did not clip the aneurysm. He also did not discuss with the family the risks and benefits of clipping the aneurysm. Aneurysms have a high risk of re-bleed, which has potentially devastating consequences. Later, Satals told Jane Doe that he did not want to sentence John Doe to life in a nursing home and sometimes doctors have to make those kinds of decisions.

John Doe was transferred from Kaiser to the Protector, a skilled nursing facility in Elk Grove, on September 24, 1999. At the Protector, the patient showed remarkable improvement. He came out of his coma, moved his limbs, squeezed his hands, tracked with his eyes and communicated using various methods. He started being weaned off his trach and tolerated several hours without the trach, breathing on his own. At the time of discharge on September 24, Kaiser had scheduled a follow-up appointment for one month. This was Kaiser's routine appointment time for a patient transferred to a nursing home. At the Protector, Kaiser made no effort to have the patient examined by a neurologist or neurosurgeon. Instead, Kaiser placed Roger Taimes, an internist and gerontologist, in charge of plaintiff patient's care. Taimes saw him only two times: September 30 and October 8. Taimes noted that John Doe would be brought back to Kaiser to have his aneurysm clipped if he showed significant improvement. By the time of his last examination, Taimes had noted many improvements. Nevertheless, Taimes never communicated with Satals or Phillips or anyone else at Kaiser Sacramento regarding these improvements and made no effort to have the patient evaluated by a neurologist or neurosurgeon. In fact, Taimes admitted that he has never recommended a patient have an aneurysm clipped.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Man Suffers Severe Injury When Sacramento Kaiser Fails to Diagnosis Aneurysm, Part 1 of 3

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:54:42 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

TEXT:
CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS
According to Plaintiff: Plaintiffs claimed that defendants failed to clip a ruptured aneurysm and monitor plaintiff patient's condition in a skilled nursing facility. The plaintiffs were John Doe, 51, and his wife, Jane Doe, 48. The defendants were Kaiser Foundation Hospital and Kaiser-related entities. John Doe suffered a right superior cerebellar artery aneurysm on August 29, 1999. On October 16, 1999 he suffered a re-bleed of the aneurysm while residing in a skilled nursing facility. He now requires full-time care and is confined to Alta Bates Herrick Hospital where he is essentially bed-ridden.

Plaintiff patient was in good health until August 1999. He experienced some headaches which seemed to resolve. On August 29, however, the headaches were so severe that he reported to the emergency room at the Sacramento Hospital. While in the emergency room, he vomited, had a seizure and became unresponsive. He was intubated immediately. He was diagnosed with a subarachnoid hemorrhage, likely due to an aneurysm, and acute hydrocephalus. He was transferred by helicopter to Kaiser Sacramento, where he came under the care of respondents.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Infant Born at Sacramento Kaiser Hospital Has Permanent Brain Damage, Part 4 of 4

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:00:00 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs further alleged that, if the infant had been properly monitored and given supplemental formula feedings, his blood sugar would not have dropped to a level low enough to cause brain damage.

Defendants contended that their care met the required standard in all respects. Defendants further contended that the infant was feeding well at the breast, as documented by the records and the testimony of the nurses and the infant's grandmother, and that the infant's hypoglycemia was due to an unpredictable, transient metabolic abnormality rather than to inadequate oral intake.

CLAIMED INJURIES
According to Plaintiff: Brain lesion; failure to develop normally; seizures; 24-hour tube feeding; emotional distress.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Sacramento Kaiser Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Due Inaccurate Oral Intake, Part 3 of 4

Wed, 18 Jan 2012 09:57:57 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Shortly before 7:00 a.m., a phlebotomist who had come to the infant's room to draw blood noted that he was not breathing. He was then taken to the well-baby nursery, where a bedside glucose check revealed a level of 15 (severely low). The infant was transferred to the special-care nursery at around 7:10 a.m. At 7:15 a.m., seizure activity was observed. Further blood glucose testing indicated that his level had dropped as low as 7. An MRI of his brain showed bilateral occipital infarction, primarily toward the back of the brain, a lesion that is commonly associated with severe hypoglycemia.

The infant was discharged from Kaiser on August 24, 2005. Since that time, he has not developed normally. At the time of the arbitration, he was two-years, 10-months old. He cannot walk, crawl, or use his arms, legs, or hands purposefully. He has no speech. He experiences seizures on a daily basis, despite being on significant doses of anti-seizure medications. Because of his inability to swallow safely, he had a gastrostomy tube placed approximately one year ago and now takes all of his feeding via the tube. He continues to live at home with his parents.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Birth Injury In Kaiser Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Causes Sever Injury in Child, Part 2 of 4

Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:54:01 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

At 22 hours of life, the infant was weighed and found to have lost 7.8 percent of his birth weight. This loss is considered significantly greater than normal. Kaiser had a policy and procedure in place such that, if there was a weight loss of 7 percent, supplemental feedings should be given under a variety of circumstances, including the baby being lethargic and not nursing vigorously enough to empty the breast. The records indicated that, on August 11, 2005 at 6:00 a.m., Plaintiff reported that the infant did not want to breast-feed. The infant was supplemented with formula at 1:00 a.m. and 4:30 a.m. on August 11, 2005.

Several notations were made on the nursing flow sheet for August 11, 2005, reflecting time spent by the infant at his mother's breasts. The records indicated satisfactory initiation of breast-feeding on a number of occasions. However, Plaintiff specifically recalled that the infant was not breast-feeding effectively at any time from birth through and including the morning of August 12, 2005. Her breasts became blistered and painful from the unsuccessful feeding attempts.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Infant Suffers Brain Injury In Kaiser Medical Malpractice Lawsuit, Part 1 of 4

Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:49:38 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
According to Plaintiff: The minor plaintiff was born at term at defendant Kaiser Foundation Hospital in Sacramento, California on August 9, 2005. He was delivered by non-elective C-section because of fetal distress. He appeared normal and had normal Apgar scores at birth.

Plaintiff, the infant's mother, had developed gestational diabetes during this, her first pregnancy. The gestational diabetes was well controlled with diet and medication. The infant's birth weight was slightly more than 7 lbs, which was well within the normal range. However, because of the risk of infants of diabetic mothers developing hypoglycemia (low blood sugar), the infant's blood sugar was checked four times during the first 24 hours of life, pursuant to Kaiser's protocol. The first measurement was 45mg/dl (the lower limit of normal), the next two measurements were 65 and 66, and the final measurement was 47.

The plan was for the infant to be breast-fed. The medical records reflected that the infant was not breast-feeding successfully on the first day of life. Accordingly, he required supplementation with formula at five hours of life and again at 10 hours of life. A lactation consultant saw the Plaintiff and the infant on August 10, 2005, and, per her chart notation and testimony, she was unable to facilitate initiation of successful breast-feeding.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

New Trial Sought By Sacramento Woman After Negligent Medical Treatment, Part 5 of 5

Mon, 19 Dec 2011 05:44:20 -0800

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

In sum, the facts presented at trial, which were not rebutted by any substantial evidence, showed that Plaintiff entered the hospital with an intact foot in which all the bones and joints, except for the navicular, were free of fractures and dislocations. The admitting x-ray established this. After a week of hospitalization under the exclusive care of Defendants, Plaintiff's foot was destroyed with many fractures and joint dislocations. Trial testimony confirmed that any attempt to surgically repair Plaintiff's foot carries a high risk of amputation.

Based on the evidence, Plaintiff, an elderly woman who must care for herself, personally suffered great physical and mental injuries, and financial loss due to those injuries. Future medical expenses, surgeries, and home care will be required to correct Plaintiff's medical condition. As the evidence showed at trial, defendant, the Regents, is responsible for Plaintiff's catastrophic injuries, and past and future physical and mental pain and suffering. For these reasons, the Court should grant Plaintiff a new trial based on the fact that there is insufficient evidence to support the verdict of the jury.

Conclusion

Based on the evidence presented at trial, each of the Plaintiff's claims against defendant Regents was proven by a preponderance of the evidence. No other reasonable conclusion can be legally deductible from the evidence.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Sacramento Woman Fights Improper Jury Verdict In Medical Malpractice Case, Part 4 of 5

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:43:21 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

8. Based on the evidence at trial, including the testimony of the experts, and the x-rays, there can be no cause for Plaintiff's injuries other than the negligent care she received during her May 2009 hospitalization at defendant Regents hospital. The admitting x-ray was misread, and the early acute phase of Charcot clearly visible in the navicular bone, was missed. Therefore, the medically necessary treatment of protecting the foot until the time limited Charcot process quieted down was not provided. Compounding these errors, Plaintiff was told by defendant doctors and other defendant Regents' employees to walk the long corridor on an unprotected foot during the acute phase. With each step, more bones were breaking and joints were dislocating. These facts, supported by substantial testimony, were uncontroverted.

9. Plaintiff was under the exclusive care and control of defendants at the time of the injuries. There were no intervening causes. In this case, it is not possible to separate the negligence from the cause of Plaintiff's injuries. It is apparent that the jury improperly speculated about some other unnamed and unknown cause that was not part of the evidence presented at trial.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Sacramento Orthopedic Physicians Commit Medical Malpractice, Part 3 of 5

Mon, 05 Dec 2011 05:42:04 -0800

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

2. In evaluating testimony, the standard of medical care can be proven only through expert testimony. Landeros v. Flood (1976) 17 Cal.3d 399, 410. The expert orthopedic surgeon called by Plaintiff, Dr. Morgan Lee, was the only expert witness qualified by his practice to present testimony regarding the treatment of Charcot Foot, except Dr. Lopez, Mrs. Johnson's treating doctor, who agreed that the only way to prevent ongoing collapse of the bones in the foot was by placing the foot in a cast.

3. Dr. Lee testified that the negligence of the University doctors in failing to timely cast, boot and otherwise protect Plaintiff's left foot during the acute phase of Charcot's, directly caused the injuries she suffered while an inpatient at the University Medical Center Hospital in May 2009. This testimony was uncontroverted.

4. Dr. Lee explained the time limited process of Charcot Foot, and the absolute necessity of casting/booting the foot during the acute phase when the bones are subject to fractures and dislocations or subluxations. This testimony was uncontroverted.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.