Peggy Tillery v. Donald Ladenheim, M.D.
Published: Mar. 1, 2008 | Result Date: Sep. 12, 2007 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 03CECG04014 Verdict – Defense
Court
Fresno Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Richard S. Salinas
(Salinas Law Group Inc.)
Experts
Plaintiff
Paul Buynak
(medical)
Michael E. Solt
(technical)
Defendant
Felix Battistella
(medical)
Constantine M. Boukidis
(technical)
Ted Vavoulis
(technical)
Neil Raskin M.D.
(medical)
Anthony Cosentino
(medical)
Facts
Pat Tillery, 47, was seen regularly by his primary care physician since October 1995 for chronic headaches. On Aug. 5, 2002, Pat went to the hospital complaining of epigastric and perumbilical pain. Defendant Donald Ladenheim, M.D., a general surgeon recommended that Pat undergo an appendectomy since the CT scan showed Pat had acute appendicitis.
After hearing of the risks and benefits of the appendectomy, Pat elected to proceed with the surgery. The surgery went fine but problems began to arise in post-op. Pat had abdominal bleeding and defendant performed a laparoscopic procedure first then an open laparotomy but could not determine the source of the bleeding. On August 8 there was some drainage out of the surgical wound but Pat was otherwise healing. On August 12, Pat was discharged.
At home, Pat's migraine developed into respiratory arrest and he was found by the paramedics to be in a scale 3 Glasgow coma requiring intubation. On August 13, Pat underwent cerebral angiography and a CT of his head, which showed a hemorrhage in his brain stem and developing hydrocephalus. On August 15, Pat underwent surgery again for debridement of the margins of the wound and a left craniotomy with fronto-temporal flap and osteotomy. Pat remained in a Scale 3 to 6 comatose during this time. Pat remained on respiratory assistance with no improvement until he was declared brain-dead on Aug. 21, 2002.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff is Pat Tillery's wife, Peggy Tillery, who alleged that the care provided to Pat was below the standard of care and that the post-operative wound infection was not treated properly. The plaintiff claimed that defendant did not get informed consent for the second procedure which accounted to a battery. Plaintiff claimed that the post-operative infection caused Pat's death.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that the care was appropriate and Pat's death was in no way related to the care that was provided by defendant.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff served defendant with an offer to compromise the matter for $499,999 which included plaintiff's costs.
Injuries
Plaintiff's husband died.
Result
The jury entered a verdict for defense.
Other Information
Insurer for defendant: Norcal Mutual Insurance Company.
Deliberation
35 minutes
Poll
12-0
Length
six days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390