Olbricht v. Hoffman
Published: Nov. 29, 2001 | Result Date: Sep. 19, 2001 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 204051 Verdict – $0
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
James J. Kjar
(Kjar, McKenna & Stockalper LLP)
Robert C. Reback
(Reback, McAndrews & Blessey LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Theodore Coutsoftides
(medical)
Defendant
Albert Yellin
(medical)
Facts
The plaintiff, a 67-year-old retired male, had a long-standing history of lesion and polyp formation in his colon,
which had been treated since 1983 by the defendantÆs father and then by the defendant. During the course of 15
years, the patient was diagnosed and treated for polyp lesions of his rectum and colon.
In August 1996, one of the biopsies showed that the plaintiff had carcinoma in situ. This was the second time
that the plaintiff had been diagnosed with carcinoma in situ in this particular area with an earlier diagnosis in
1990. At that time, the possibility of invasive surgery was discussed including the potential risks and
complications. However, it was determined that the lesion could be treated with a local excision under
colonoscope. This was performed in August 1996.
In December 1997, the defendant removed an inflammatory polyp. One month later, the patient was scoped on
Jan. 29, 1998 and the defendant noted that the plaintiff had multiple polyps in the same area. Because the
plaintiffÆs polyp disease appeared to be proliferating in an aggressive manner, the defendant felt that the most
prudent course of action was to perform a low anterior resection of the entire area of the colon where these
polyps were developing. Although scoping and fulguration was an option, the defendant explained to the
plaintiff that he felt the preferable course of treatment was to perform a lower anterior resection or face a
significant risk of an aggressive and invasive cancer forming, should conservative modalities of treatment fail.
On Jan. 30, 1998, the defendant had an extensive discussion with the plaintiff and his wife and discussed the
risks of surgery, including nerve damage, impotence, incontinence, bleeding and death.
On Feb. 11, 1998, the defendant performed the lower anterior resection on the plaintiff.
Post-operatively, the patient had complaints of urinary retention, fecal incontinence and erectile
dysfunction.
Settlement Discussions
Prior to trial, the plaintiff presented an offer of $29,999. The defendant offered a waiver of costs in exchange for a dismissal.
Specials in Evidence
The trial was bifurcated with the damages issues not addressed The trial was bifurcated with the damage issues not addressed. The trial was bifurcated with the damage issues not addressed The trial was bifurcated with the damage issues not addressed
Injuries
The plaintiff suffered permanent fecal incontinence, urinary retention and erectile dysfunction.
Other Information
The trial was bifurcated with the damages issues not addressed.
Deliberation
half day
Poll
12-0 (negligence), 11-1 (informed consent)
Length
five days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390