Facts

An 87-year-old dementia patient went to defendant's outpatient imaging center for a routine CT scan of her brain. Plaintiff fell while trying to get off the exam table before it was lowered, falling to the ground and fracturing her upper femur (hip bone). Plaintiff was transported from the imaging facility by ambulance and thereafter underwent surgical repair with the implantation of a rod and pin into her femur. After five days in the hospital, plaintiff spent an additional 73 days in a post-acute care facility. Due to COVID, plaintiff's family was not permitted to visit her in the hospital nor for the first two weeks at the post-acute care facility.

Defendant's CT technician was the only witness to what occurred and claimed at deposition that the patient was struggling to get off the table and that she helped plaintiff off the table and slowly lowered her to the floor--never observing a fall. At trial the CT tech changed her story, claiming that she lowered the CT table, helped plaintiff stand up and only after seeing plaintiff sway (seemingly dizzy), gently lowered plaintiff to the floor with the assistance of another employee.

Plaintiff's expert radiologist, as well as a CT technician with 33 years experience, both opined that due to plaintiff's advanced age and presentation with dementia that Velcro safety straps, readily available on all CT tables, were required to have been placed across plaintiff's torso during the exam to prevent her from getting off the table prior to the lowering of the table. The treating orthopedic surgeon who repaired plaintiff's hip testified that the nature of plaintiff's fracture was caused by a force equal to a fall from standing height - which was about equal to the height of the CT table when raised for a scan. Plaintiff's biomechanical expert cited multiple studies that supported the treater's opinion to refute that the fracture could be caused from plaintiff being gently lowered to the floor.

Due to her advanced dementia, plaintiff was never able to provide an account of what happened to her and was never deposed. By the time of trial plaintiff's dementia had progressed to the point where she was in hospice care and unable to attend trial. Plaintiff's story of pain and recovery was told by her husband and daughter.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that plaintiff never fell, it was reasonable to lower plaintiff to the floor due to her dizziness, and the fracture likely occurred because she had osteoporosis and could occur from merely stepping off the table.

Insurer

NORCAL Mutual Insurance Company

Specials in Evidence

Meds: $78,331 (stipulated)

Damages

Past non-economic damages: $365,500 (reduced to $250,000 due to MICRA)

Result

Plaintiff's verdict for $443,831.

Length

eight days