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
Negligent Care

Herma Johanna Denove v. Kaiser Foundation Hospital

Published: May 24, 1997 | Result Date: May 2, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: LC032744 –  $70,000

Judge

Robert A. Fox

Kenneth R. Zuetel Jr.

Thomas T. Johnson

Court

American Arbitration Association


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Daniel P. Powell
(Thon, Beck, Vanni, Callahan & Powell)


Defendant

David A. Arkuss


Experts

Plaintiff

Darwood B. Hance
(technical)

Rex Greene
(medical)

Robert J. McKenna Jr.
(medical)

Defendant

David Seivers
(medical)

Thompson Adams
(medical)

Facts

In 1988, claimant Herma Johanna Denove, a 65-year-old retired real estate sales agent and Kaiser volunteer, presented at respondent Kaiser for a screening mammogram, which was normal. In 1992 and 1993, defendant Kaiser Foundation Hospital performed screening mammograms, which were also interpreted as normal. In 1994, the claimant detected a lump in her left breast. She went to the Kaiser walk-in clinic, at which time the Kaiser physician ordered a surgical consultation and mammogram. The mammogram was interpreted as suspicious for cancer and described a 2.5 centimeter spiculated lesion which had been present since the 1992 mammogram. The Kaiser surgical consultant determined that the claimant had benign fibrocystic disease and was unaware that the 1994 mammogram had been performed. He instructed the claimant to return in six months. The claimant returned in February 1995, at which time the Kaiser surgeon discovered that the July 1994 mammogram had been performed and described a spiculated lesion. A biopsy was then performed by the surgical consultant. The pathologist found a high grade infiltrating ductal carcinoma which was approximately 2.8 centimeters in size. The Kaiser surgeons advised the claimant that she had the option of a lumpectomy with radiation, or a modified radical mastectomy. The surgeons contended that they told the claimant that either option was acceptable and carried the same risks concerning survival. The claimant contended that although she was offered a choice, the surgeons said that she had no real choice and strongly recommended mastectomy. The claimant asked for an outside consultation and obtained one through the City of Hope. The City of Hope told the claimant that she did have a choice, but recommended the mastectomy option in light of the claimant's history of congestive heart failure and potential radiation complications. The claimant underwent the modified radical mastectomy in April 1995. The surgical pathology on the removed breast showed that the axillary lymph nodes were negative. The claimant has no evidence of metastatic breast disease as of the date of the arbitration and is otherwise in good health. The claimant brought this action against the respondents based on medical negligence and malpractice theories of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $250,000. The defendant made no settlement offers.

Other Information

The award was rendered by a three member panel appproximately one year and eleven months after the case was filed.


#79574

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

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