Hilda Sosa, et al. v. Tze Yu Dang
Published: Oct. 25, 2001 | Result Date: Jul. 2, 2001 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: EC027204 Verdict – $440,000
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Burbank
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Robert Beauchesne
(medical)
Defendant
James J. Katz
(medical)
Facts
Pablo Sosa, the decedent, age 68, began treatment with the defendant, Tze Yu Dang, an internist and cardiologist
in 1995. For a period of three years, the defendant was the patient's primary care physician, seeing the patient
approximately 8-10 times per year for routine appointments. During early 1998, a routine blood test revealed
an elevated PSA level (sometimes associated with prostate cancer). The defendant recommended evaluation by
a urologist to rule out prostate cancer. However, the patient refused the referral and that refusal was noted on
the patient's records. For the next five or six visits, each time the defendant made the recommendation for a
referral, the patient declined and such was written within the chart by the defendant.
On Dec. 15, 1998, the patient presented to the defendant's office with complaints of a pulsating mass in his
abdomen. After an examination, including an abdominal ultrasound, the patient was diagnosed with an intra
abdominal aortic aneurysm (dilation of the arterial wall which is a life-threatening condition if not surgically
corrected before the aneurysm bursts). After this diagnosis, the defendant decided to have the patient undergo
an angiogram of abdominal aorta and coronary arteries on Dec. 23, 1998.
The angiogram revealed an 8-10 cm aneurysm which is an extremely large and serious condition. No referral to
a vascular surgeon was made at that time. Despite the fact that the patient was asymptomatic to any
cardiovascular complaints, the defendant scheduled the patient to undergo an angioplasty first, then a few
weeks later, he would refer the patient to a vascular surgeon for aneurysm repair.
On Dec. 29, the patient was not feeling well, secondary to the angiogram, which had been completed just a few
days earlier. The patient requested that the angioplasty procedure be continued for a week's time and that
request was granted.
On Jan. 7, 1999, the defendant performed an angioplasty that was successful and uneventful. Despite the life-
threatening condition, which the patient had, the patient was discharge home without a vascular surgery
consult or arrangements for completion of the intra abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. The patient was
informed to contact the defendant's office about a week's time.
On Jan. 21, the patient was seen by the defendant at his office. The patient complained
of swollen feet and sweats (possible signs of vascular insufficiency secondary to leaking of the
aneurysm). Despite these complaints, the defendant took no action and referred the patient to a
vascular surgeon. Shortly after the patient returned home from the defendant's office, his
aneurysm ruptured and the patient died.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiffs made a C.C.P. Section 998 demand of $199,999.99, which was rejected by the defendant. No offer was made on behalf of the defendant prior to the verdict. As a result of the verdict, in combination with the offer to compromise, the plaintiffs received additional costs and interest on top of the jury award.
Injuries
The plaintiffs claimed general damages for the loss of both a husband and father to seven children. Additionally, the plaintiffs claimed funeral expenses associated with the decedent's burial.
Other Information
<P>The defendant's motion for new trial has been denied in its entirety.</P>
Deliberation
eight hours
Poll
12-0 (liability), 12-0 (causation), 10-2 (damages)
Length
10 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390