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 (Non-Vehicular)
Medical Malpractice
Failure to Diagnose

Vanessa J. Poeschel v. Allen Mau, M.D.

Published: Mar. 8, 1997 | Result Date: May 1, 1996 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 5189162 –  $0

Judge

Gary R. Kerkorian

Court

Fresno Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Roger T. Nuttall


Defendant

Mario L. Beltramo Jr.


Experts

Plaintiff

James G. Tappan
(medical)

Defendant

Edward L. Felix
(medical)

William C. Fowkes
(medical)

Facts

In June 1993, plaintiff Vanessa J. Poeschel, a 46-year-old bookkeeper, was diagnosed as having a large pelvic mass that had metastasized to her lungs, and had grown into both her bladder and left ureter. The tumor, which was initially thought to be cancerous, in actuality was a very rare tumor known as a benign metastasizing leiomyoma. At the time of its discovery, the tumor was described as being "basketball size." The plaintiff claimed that defendant Dr. Allen Mau, who had been her doctor for many years prior to 1993, was negligent in failing to diagnose the pelvic mass. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on medical malpractice and negligence theories of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The settlement discussions were not disclosed.

Other Information

The plaintiff waived her right to file a new trial motion in exchange for a waiver of costs. EXPERT TESTIMONY: In contrast to the testimony of plaintiff's doctor James Tappan, which was that a pelvic exam should have been done on an annual basis, Dr. Mau and Dr. William Fowkes both testified that in a patient such as the plaintiff, who was a post-hysterectomy patient, the performance of a pelvic and pap examination every two to three years, was entirely appropriate. Both Dr. Mau and Dr. Fowkes, however, conceded that if the plaintiff had complained of something growing in her abdomen, this would warrant further testing.

Deliberation

1 hour

Poll

10-2

Length

7 days


#79366

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

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