Court was Wrong to Dismiss Case-Now the Parties Wait Longer for Justice
AppId is over the quota
Posted on Mar 04, 2008
A typical tactic used by Virginia medical malpractice insurance companies to defend claims ateries are mistakenly clamped or sutured or cut in surgery is to say "well, the anatomy was abnormal," and that's why it happened.
The Virgnia Supreme Court recently held that a trial court was wrong in dismissing a case where there was conflicting evidence that there was abnormal anatomy.
Clifford Lewis Fanucci, Sr., died after undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for a cancerous growth on his kidney. Daniel Mark Hoffman, M.D. clamped the right renal artery instead of the left renal artery during surgery. When he discovered his error, he unclamped the artery but it tore, killing his patient.
There was conflicting evidence at trial about whether Fanucci's anatomy was unusual. Doctors who came in to repair the torn right renal artery that they found nothing abnormal. The pathologist who did the autopsy said he found nothing unusual about the position of the right renal artery, either.
The only doctors to testify that there was anything 'unusual' about the right renal artery were the defendant and his partner!
The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the trial court and ordered a new trial.
Comment from Virginia Medical Malpractice Attorney Ben Glass: the actions of the trial judge are frightening and demonstrate just how difficult a jurisdiction Virginia is for medical malpractice cases. As I read the opinion, there was basically guess-work on the part of the defendant and his partner as to how or why he managed to clamp the wrong artery. There was no real 'evidence' on this issue. In fact, the only real 'evidence' from two indepedent doctors who actually saw the right renal artery was that the anatomy was normal. To me this case is not even close and there is no way the judge should have stopped the jury from making the decision.
This was enourmously expensive for both parties. Even if the judge felt the case should not have been decided by the jury he should have allowed them to decide it later. Then, he could have reversed the jury's decision, but at least the Supreme Court could have reinstated the jury's verdict.
The judge was wrong.. now the parties wait at least another year, spend another $$75,000 or so to retry the case.
Court was wrongly dismissed case now the parties justice wait longer
Posted on the Mar 04, 2008
Companies to defend claims of Ateries be clamped incorrectly a typical tactic of Virginia medical malpractice insurance or sewn or cut in surgery is to say, "the anatomy was good, abnormal" used, and that is why it is happening.
The Virgnia Supreme Court recently held that a trial court incorrectly was the dismissal in a case where it contradictory evidence, that there were abnormal anatomy.
Clifford Lewis Fanucci, SR., died after a hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for a cancer growth on his kidneys. Daniel mark Hoffman, MD clamped right renal artery instead of the left renal artery during surgery. When he discovered his error he unclamped the artery, but it tore his patients kill.
There was conflicting evidence at the trial about whether Fanucci of Anatomy was unusual. Doctors, who came to repair torn right renal artery, which they nothing abnormal found. The pathologist who did the autopsy said, that it unusual either on the position of the entire renal artery, found nothing.
The only doctors to testify were the defendant and his partner that there was nothing unusual about right renal artery!
The Supreme Court reversed the decision the trial court and ordered a new procedure.
Comment by Virginia medical malpractice lawyer Ben glass: the actions of the trial judge are frightening and show a jurisdiction is just how difficult Virginia for medical malpractice cases. As I read the opinion, there were terminals in the reason guess work of the defendant and his partner, the wrong artery how or why he made it. There was no real "evidence" on this issue. In fact, was the only real "evidence" from two independent doctors, the actually right renal artery saw that the anatomy was normal. This case is not even close to me and there is no way the judge the jury of the decision should have stopped.
This was Enourmously expensive for both parties. Even if the judge that the case from the jury should have decided that he they later decide it should have allowed felt. Then could he reversed, that the jury could at least but the Supreme Court the jury judgment have reinstated.
The judge was wrong... now the parties wait for at least another year, spend a further $$ 75,000 or so, to repeat the event.
