This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Medical Malpractice
Failure to Diagnose

Hilda Lavergne and Hilda Lavergne, as successor-in-interest to Martin Lavergne v. Sutter Medical Group, Marion W. Leff, M.D., and Does 1 through 50, inclusive

Published: Dec. 28, 2013 | Result Date: Mar. 7, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 34-2010-00086267-CU-PN-GDS Verdict –  Defense

Court

Sacramento Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Serafina Raskin

Tyler D. Offenhauser
(Bremer, Whyte, Brown & O'Meara LLP)


Defendant

Michael J. Campbell
(Higgs, Fletcher & Mack LLP)

Robert H. Zimmerman
(Schuering, Zimmerman & Doyle LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Richard Greengold
(medical)

Omid Vahdat
(medical)

Brian Bergmark
(technical)

Jeremy S. Kroes
(medical)

Defendant

Mark Sockell
(medical)

Warren Johnston
(medical)

Ted W. Hard
(medical)

Facts

On Dec. 29, 2009, Martin Lavergne went to Sutter Medical Group in Sacramento complaining of shortness of breath and other problems breathing. Dr. Marion Leff examined Lavergne and determined he was healthy for his age. The next day, Lavergne had a heart attack and died. His wife, Hilda, filed a lawsuit against Sutter and Dr. Leff.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff argued that defendants didn't diagnose Lavergne on time, and should have sent him to receive proper care, which plaintiff claimed amounted to medical malpractice. Specifically, plaintiffs argued that an in-office EKG should have been done, or referral to a cardiology specialist for a workup.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants argued that no further workups were needed according to the relevant standard of care, given that the patient didn't have any chest problems and his problems breathing generally happened at a high altitude. Defendants argued that the risk of sudden death was very minimal, and Lavergne's coronary artery was blocked by 96 percent such that even a sooner diagnosis wouldn't have stopped it from happening.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff demanded $30,000 and no offer was returned.

Injuries

Lavergne suffered from a myocardial infarction and died. His wife sought compensation for his wrongful death and loss of society.

Result

The jury's verdict favored the defense because it found that Dr. Leff's negligence wasn't a substantial factor in bringing about Lavergne's death.


#112810

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390