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.

Medical
Malpractice
Product Liability

John Doe v. Roe Hospital, Roe Product Manufacturer

Published: May 5, 2023 | Result Date: Nov. 8, 2022 | Filing Date: Oct. 17, 2019 |

Settlement –  $2,500,000

Judge

Daniel M. Crowley

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Benjamin T. Ikuta
(Ikuta Hemesath LLP)


Defendant

Kathryn Mosely
(Leibl, Miretsky & Mosely LLP)

Lee M. Moulin
(Leibl, Miretsky & Mosely LLP)


Facts

John Doe presented for surgery on October 18, 2018 for a four-level cervical
laminoplasty. The surgeons were employees of the hospital. Following the surgery, John Doe had worsening cervical stenosis, losing 4.5 liters of blood, had significant SSEP intraoperative neuromonitoring losses showing nerve damage, had a cerebral spinal fluid leak, had acute blood loss anemia, and hypotension due to hypovolemia. He needed four separate transfusions totaling 1110 mL of Frozen Fresh Plasma, five transfusions totaling 1500 mL of Packed Red Blood Cells, and transfusion of 298 mL of platelets.

John Doe ended up needing additional laminectomies by a different neurosurgeon
at the same level. Even though the surgeries went relatively well, John Doe still suffered from significant left-sided weakness and had difficulties walking and using his hands.

There was an ERISA lien in the case that preempted MICRA's laws against
subrogation in the amount of $502,000.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that the surgeons improperly allowed a resident to perform the surgery, including to cut through his spine to perform the laminoplasty. Plaintiff contended that the surgeons were not honest with Plaintiff about what happened and attempted to hide their malpractice as the operative report noted no complications and emails to the providers were unanswered. Plaintiff's case was bolstered by the subsequent treating neurosurgeon, who stated that the previous laminoplasty cuts weretoo wide and below the standard of care.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: The hospital contended that the poor result and bleeding were a recognized risk of a complicated, four-level surgery. The hospital contended that the cause of the damage to the spine was a broken blade, which the hospital contended was a recognized risk. The hospital contended that the patient had significant stenosis even prior to the surgery.

The manufacturer of the blade primarily mirrored the allegations of plaintiff, noting that the only parties at fault were the medical providers and not any equipment failure.

Result

The case resolved following a successful mediation with Jake Courtney of ADR Services, Inc. The hospital paid $2,500,000 while the manufacturer paid $0.


#140930

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

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