Posts Tagged ‘ medical malpractice ’

Week Adjourned: 4.8.11

April 8th, 2011. By LucyC

Top Class Actions

HAMPered Loan Modifications? It seems there’s no end in sight to the mortgage crisis—with new twists and victims appearing regularly. In fact, you could argue that it’s spawned a whole spin-off industry of fraud, and related legal actions. For example, this week, Saxon Mortgage Inc, the mortgage service division of Morgan Stanley, was hit with a potential class action lawsuit over allegations that the company uses the Homeowners Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) to attract customers into making “trial” payments on loans it has no intention of ever permanently modifying.

Filed in Northern California, the suit alleges a pattern of misconduct by Saxon which involves collecting trial payments, delaying the processing of loan modifications, and then denying the application altogether for demonstrably false reasons. Where do you start?

The suit’s lead plaintiff, a small business owner in San Francisco, Marie Gaudin, had, like millions of Americans, fallen on hard times as a result of the recession and approached Saxon for a loan modification on her home. Long story short, she was directed to Saxon’s “Home Preservation Department” and subsequently asked to provide extensive documentation of her financial condition, which she did. She received a written agreement from them that appeared to promise a permanent HAMP loan modification after she made three “trial” payments as proof she could handle the loan repayments. But—Saxon didn’t honor its agreement. Are we surprised?

The suit claims that Saxon delayed the processing of the HAMP loan modification, while Gaudin continued to make trial payments, which were duly noted as received in correspondence from Saxon. Nevertheless, Saxon denied her a permanent HAMP modification. According to the suit Saxon claimed that Gaudin had failed to make payments or comply with document requests. They also allegedly claimed that she did not make payments, while in the same letter actually acknowledged that she was current on all payments (do they not read their own correspondence before it goes out?). Saxon also claimed that the U.S. Treasury Department was involved in reviewing HAMP applications. Who gets paid to think this stuff up?

Not surprisingly, the suit alleges that Saxon’s breach of contract, rescission and restitution, and deceptive debt collection practices violated California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (Rosenthal Act), and fraudulent, unlawful, and unfair business practices under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL).

Top Settlements

Goodyear Discrimination Suit Settles. Here’s a good news story—we like those. A jury in Cumberland, NC recently awarded Lashanda Shaw $450,000 as settlement of her wrongful termination suit against Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.’s Fayetteville plant this week.

Court documents reportedly state that Shaw was fired for making a complaint about racial and sexual discrimination in the workplace. She filed her suit in 2009. When she finally got to court the trial took five weeks with the jury unanimously agreed on the compensatory damages. I’ll bet she’s sleeping better now.

May be Justice—but at What Cost? A 79-year old woman in Scranton, PA was awarded $550K this week as settlement of her medical malpractice case. But here’s the downside—Irene Doherty filed the suit because she suffered a 23-month delay in the diagnosis of her lung cancer. The verdict was returned against radiologist Earl Detrick, who practiced in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, PA, prior to retiring.

Ms. Doherty’s lawyers argued that Detrick failed to properly report to Doherty or her physician his conclusions regarding a computerized tomography (CT) scan of her chest. That’s helpful. It turns out that that scan revealed a mass in Doherty’s right lung that required medical follow-up—but it wasn’t brought to Ms. Doherty’s attention until nearly two years later when she underwent a subsequent CT scan of her chest. The second scan revealed a much larger cancerous mass. So, in the 23 months between CT scans, the mass had doubled in size, and was inoperable. Worse, the cancer had spread to Doherty’s lymph nodes. Frankly, I find this astonishing—how does this kind of oversight happen?

Needless to say, Doherty’s suffering and physical deterioration due to her lung cancer could have been prevented had the radiologist done his job—which was to report the results of the January 2007 CT scan as soon as he saw them. And that’s exactly what her lawyers argued. If nothing else Doherty’s case emphasizes the importance of being your own advocate when it comes to healthcare. Don’t get me started…

Ok. That’s it for this week. See you at the bar.

Tags: Discrimination, Dr. Earl Detrick, Employment lawsuit, Goodyear Tire and Rubber, HAMP, Homeowners Affordable Modification Program, Irene Doherty, Leshanda Shaw, loan modification, Marie Gaudin, medical malpractice, Morgan Stanley, Saxon Mortgage
Posted in Week Adjourned | 7542No Comments »Week+Adjourned%3A+4.8.112011-04-08+18%3A51%3A26LucyC

Harsh Reality: Elective Cosmetic Surgery vs Medical Malpractice

April 6th, 2011. By AbiK

Just yesterday, we posted about Marilyn Leisz—the New Jersey woman who underwent an operation to fix an earlier operation and a congenital defect—on her eyes. Actually, MSNBC reports that she has had 30 surgeries to correct the problem. But the corrective procedures have left her unable to close her eyes.

So, Leisz filed a medical malpractice suit against her cosmetic surgeon, Dr. Paul Parker, and was just awarded $115,000. And she’s not happy about it. Who can blame her? After all, the amount seems a bit small given that she has to use a special gel and vaporizer to keep her eyes moist, and she has to sleep with a mask at night to prevent her from scratching her corneas. And she is at risk for blindness—listen to her describe her plight in the above msnbc.com video.

One has to wonder—how did the jury figure out $115,000? as in only $115,000?

Leisz said her life has been thrown into shambles. “I feel like my whole life has been stolen from me,” she told NBC News. “Your eyesight affects everything that you do.”

The simple tasks the rest of us take for granted every day—things like showering, or even sleeping—have become major events requiring a fair amount of preparation for Leisz.

While it’s easy to question why Leisz may have needed (and willingly undergone) some 30 procedures, the interesting part of this is how a cosmetic surgery malpractice case plays out in the legal arena. At least in this instance, it seems as though there’s a bit of a ”well, she should’ve known” or “heck, she’s the one who signed on for it” attitude—and maybe at times Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: cosmetic surgery, Dr Paul Parker, Elective Surgery, marilyn leisz, medical malpractice
Posted in Drugs/Medical, Emerging Issues | 74841 Comment »2011-04-06+16%3A22%3A56AbiK

Botched Procedure: When Corrective Surgery Doesn’t Correct

April 5th, 2011. By LucyC

What would you do if you couldn’t fully close your eyes? Personally, I can’t imagine how awful that would be. And what if this condition was a result of surgery—surgery that was meant to correct an existing problem?

These days, the news is full of ‘bad plastic surgery’ stories, complete with some pretty horrifying images. In the case of New Jersey resident, Marilyn Leisz, the outcome is particularly tragic, and resulted in her suing her plastic surgeon for medical malpractice.

The back story is that six years ago Leisz had a condition known as ptosis which weakens the eyelids, eventually causing them to droop. Having tried for years to correct the condition, she eventually decided to go the cosmetic surgery route and in 2000 had her first eyelift. All went well. In 2005 she had a second eyelift. But shortly after this surgery Leisz began to grow concerned because she noticed the development of small bumps along the creases of her eyelids. She became concerned about her vision.

So Leisz consulted with a new plastic surgeon (Dr. Paul Parker), who recommended trying a scar removal product before embarking on more surgery. She tried the product and it didn’t work. Then, in consultation with her new surgeon, she underwent a procedure called blepharoplasty in which the excess tissue and fat is removed from around the eye. That’s when things started to go horribly wrong.

According to a story on MSNBC.com, Leisz said was led to believe the procedure was minor and that there shouldn’t be any problems. If anything—it should give her a more youthful appearance.

We all know where this is going. Following the surgery, Leisz found she couldn’t close her eyes completely. This resulted in her eyes burning, and her tear ducts not functioning as they were supposed to. Her surgeon allegedly told her this was part of the healing process. But when that healing process turned out to be never-ending, she sought the opinion of another plastic surgeon. He must have confirmed her worst fears—telling her she should never have undergone the blepharoplasty which this doctor testified to in court. Reportedly, Leisz has undergone a total of 30 surgeries, which have enabled her to partially close her eyes.

She did sue the surgeon who performed the blepharoplasty, and was recently awarded $115,000. In fact they found that the surgeon had deviated from the accepted standard of care in this instance.

While she said she is glad she had her day in court, the fact is Leisz’s ordeal is far from over. She has to use a special gel and vaporizer to keep her eyes moist, and she has to sleep with a mask at night to prevent her from scratching her corneas.

Leisz told TODAY’s Ann Curry “To take a shower, I have to put gel into my eyes so the water and the soap doesn’t get into my eyes. Then by the time the shower is done, the gel’s washed out.” Worse, she lives with the fear of infection, glaucoma, corneal ulcers and blindness which could result from her medication.

In the MSNBC story, Leisz said her life has been thrown into shambles. “I feel like my whole life has been stolen from me,” she told NBC News. “Your eyesight affects everything that you do.”

Tags: cosmetic surgery, Dr Paul Parker, Elective Surgery, marilyn leisz, medical malpractice, plastic surgery, ptosis
Posted in Drugs/Medical | 7514No Comments »2011-04-05+20%3A14%3A46LucyC

Tenet Healthcare Katrina Class Action at Tentative Settlement

March 28th, 2011. By LucyC

Six years later and counting—the mess from Hurricane Katrina drags on. This month, one of America’s largest health care corporations was due to go to court over allegations that it is responsible for deaths and injuries at a hospital in the Big Easy during the hurricane.

However, in the middle of jury selection last week, Tenet Health/Memorial Medical Center reached a tentative settlement—the details of which will not be disclosed until it has received final court approval.

The class action lawsuit is brought on behalf of people who were essentially marooned at the Memorial Medical Center during the storm of the century. It alleges that the hospital had insufficient electrical back-up in place to deal with the events, as well as failed plans for patient care and evacuation, which resulted in death and in injuries. The hospital sheltered about 1,800 people during the hurricane.

Memorial hospital was owned by Tenet Healthcare Corporation, but has since been sold, along with the company’s other Louisiana hospitals, interestingly. At the time, Tenet reportedly did not have an emergency command system set up to deal with the catastrophe —but instead instigated a plan during the hurricane. While officials at Tenet lobbied to get federal rescuers to help out—and who ultimately did not—the company, realizing it was on its own, spent something like $1 million Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana, medical malpractice, Memorial Medical Center, Tenet Health
Posted in Class Action, Drugs/Medical, Personal Injury | 7352No Comments »2011-03-28+20%3A41%3A36LucyC

Medical Malpractice: It Takes Two, Baby

March 24th, 2011. By Kristine B

If you’ve ever watched any of the seemingly endless supply of medical dramas on television (Grey’s Anatomy, House, Private Practice…) you’ve probably heard the phrase “medical malpractice”—or some variation of it—tossed about threateningly. It’s also a popular plot twist in soap operas—General Hospital fans will recall Dr. Patrick Drake (and his half-brother, Matt) being sued for malpractice.

Great as it may be for adding intrigue to a plotline, medical malpractice—or at least the true meaning of it—tends to get lost and twisted in the drama. So this week, Pleading Ignorance shines a light on what medical malpractice, otherwise affectionately known as “med mal”, is…

Let’s start with the more technical version: medical malpractice is either an act or failure to act on the part of a health care provider, where that act or omission deviates from reasonable standards of care in the field and causes harm to the patient. Got that? Basically, medical malpractice has two parts. First, the negligence and second, the harm to the patient.

1. Medical Malpractice: The Negligence

The negligence part of medical malpractice is the first part of the explanation above. Negligence is any act or failure to act by a medical professional where the care provided does not meet generally accepted standards of practice. So, what does that mean? It means that person providing the health care—a doctor, nurse, dentist or any health care professional—does not provide care that meets accepted standards.

That’s important, because there’s a difference between a medical professional being negligent and a medical professional who has done all he can to help a patient but still can’t find the answers.

Say a patient, we’ll call her Sarah, goes to the doctor with a variety of symptoms. Dr. A runs test after test, has follow-up visits, consults with other doctors and still can’t determine the cause of Sarah’s problems. Finally, after a long process, Dr. A determines that Sarah has cancer and the cancer has progressed too far to be operable. Dr. A is not necessarily guilty of medical malpractice because he has met an accepted standard of care by sending Sarah for tests, scheduling follow-up appointments and so on.

Now, say Sarah goes to Dr. B. Dr. B listens to Sarah for a while but ultimately decides that her pain is in her head. So he sends her home without requesting any tests and does not offer to follow up with her. Sarah repeatedly sees Dr. B with the same complaints, but is always dismissed by the doctor. Eventually, a different doctor diagnoses Sarah with cancer, but by then the cancer is not treatable. Dr. B may be guilty of medical malpractice for not meeting a reasonable standard of care in Sarah’s situation.

Whether or not a doctor is negligent depends on whether a reasonably competent doctor who has Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: medical malpractice
Posted in Drugs/Medical, Pleading Ignorance | 6084No Comments »2011-03-24+11%3A39%3A12Kristine+B