Facts

In November 2002, Benjamin Lucero, 64, suffered a heart attack and was admitted to the emergency room for an acute myocardial infarction. Following a cardiology work up including angiogram and echocardiogram, he underwent a quadruple bypass for the purpose of alleviating shortness of breath and fatigue. Thereafter, Lucero claimed that his problems persisted. Lucero sued Dr. Michael Richman and Twin Cities Cardiothoracic Surgery, Richman's medical group. Lucero alleged medical malpractice.

PLAINTIFF CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the surgical approach was inappropriate in that the bypsss grafts included a normal coronary artery. Instead, he claimed it was his aortic valve that necessitated surgery which was not performed. The plaintiff contended that he would need another surgery to repair the actual problem. The plaintiff also contended that as a result of the unnecessary bypass, a complication occurred at the anastomosis of the graft vessel leading to further occlusion and necessitating a second procedure in August 2003, and that the aortic valve remains insufficient and will require an additional surgery in the next few years.

DEFENDANT CONTENTIONS:
The defense contended that the bypass was appropriate because the angiogram revealed a significant lesion at the take-off of the ramus artery and, as such, a bypass was indicated and appropriate. The defense further contended that the aortic valve problem was mild and did not require surgical intervention.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff demanded $150,000 and the defendants offered $29,999.

Specials in Evidence

$26,000

Damages

The plaintiff sought damages for pain and suffering. The plaintiff's wife sought damages for loss of consortium.

Injuries

The plaintiff claimed that because his aortic valve was the problem and that he continued to suffer from shortness of breath and fatigue even after the bypass due to a restricted blood flow caused by a progressive occlusion at the anastomosis of the graft vessel for the ramus artery. In addition, the plaintiff claimed he suffered complications from the bypass that required a corrective angioplasty and stenting. Further, plaintiff contended that the aortic insufficiency remained and the need for surgical intervention would be medically certain. The defendant contended that the aortic insufficiency continued to be mild in nature, stable, and would not require additional surgery.

Result

The plaintiff asked the jury for $300,000 plus specials. The jury returned a defense verdict after determining that the bypass was necessary.

Deliberation

2.5 hours

Poll

11-1

Length

five days