Facts

The plaintiff developed a cough which persisted over several months. She was evaluated by her internist with a chest X-ray and CT scan. They revealed a 3cm mass in her right hilum (edge of lung). She was referred to defendant pulmonologist who obtained a PET scan. That scan indicated that the mass was highly suspicious for cancer. Biopsies were done of the hilar mass and of a lung "scar" incidentally found at surgery. Both specimens were read by a community pathologist as tuberculosis. The patient obtained a second opinion from University of California, Los Angeles. Biopsy slides were mixed up and as a result UCLA only interpreted the biopsy slides of the "scar." UCLA read those as pulmonary infarction with no evidence of tuberculosis. This information was conveyed in a phone call to defendant pulmonologist by UCLA.

Defendant informed plaintiff that UCLA's finding was incorrect and that she absolutely did have tuberculosis and needed treatment. Neither plaintiff nor defendant were aware that UCLA was only interpreting the slides of the "scar" and not the suspicious hilar mass. Plaintiff was convinced by defendant of the diagnosis of tuberculosis and obtained appropriate therapy. She clinically improved on therapy; however, her cough never completely resolved. Approximately 11 months later plaintiff's symptoms worsened and a new physician obtained a chest X-ray. That X-ray showed that the hilar mass which had been diagnosed as tuberculosis had grown from 3cm to 8cm. The original slide material was re-reviewed by other pathologists and the hilar mass was determined to be an aggressive sarcoma. The "scar" was determined to be pulmonary infarction caused by presence of the sarcoma. Plaintiff was operated on at Cedars Sinai Hospital and the sarcoma was found to have invaded her heart, large vessels and extensively into her right lung. Metastases were found approximately five months later and were treated. Plaintiff is currently in a very grave condition.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that defendant pulomonologist failed to appropriately evaluate the conflicting findings from the community pathologist and UCLA. One found TB and the other found pulmonary infarction. Had those conflicting findings been properly investigated, the presence of a pulmonary artery sarcoma would have been detected approximately one year earlier when it was curable. The delay resulted in the tumor invading surrounding structures and disseminating widely with resultant diminished life expectancy.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendant contended that he never received a phone call from UCLA with the results of the second opinion. He also contended that if he had received the phone call, he would have been alarmed and done an extensive work-up. Defendant further contended that other parties, some of whom had settled, were solely responsible for the damage. Finally, defendant contended that the sarcoma was uniformly fatal in a brief time regardless of the promptness of detection or method of treatment.

Settlement Discussions

Defendant offered nothing. Plaintiff made a policy limit demand of $1 million.

Result

Award was $6,820,849, less previous settlements of $2.8 million. Economic damages: $6,320,849; non economic: $500,000.

Other Information

C. Bernard Kaufman from ARC was the neutral arbitrator, P. Theodore Hammond, was defense party arbitrator, and Sanford M. Gage was the plaintiff's party arbitrator.