Confidential
Settlement – $1,000,000Court
Orange Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Daniel M. Hodes
(Hodes Milman LLP)
Defendant
Kenneth R. Pivo
(Pivo, Halbreich, Martin & Wilson LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Stephen T. Riley
(technical)
David B. Sacks
(medical)
Mark Stephen Borchert
(medical)
James Collins
(medical)
Alfredo A. Sadun M.D.
(medical)
G. Michael Morris
(technical)
Defendant
Ted Vavoulis
(technical)
Stuart M. Cohen
(medical)
John D. Hofbauer
(medical)
Barrett Katz
(medical)
Gene Bruno M.S., C.R.C., C.C.M., C.D.M.S.
(technical)
Michael O'Brien
(medical)
Facts
The plaintiff, then 4-years-old was referred by his HMO pediatrician to the HMO optometrist, whom he saw on Sept. 18, 1991. The plaintiff's vision was essentially normal in the left eye but was noted to be light perception only in the right eye. In addition, atrophy of the right optic nerve was noted in the right eye as was exotropia. The HMO optometrist referred the minor to the defendant HMO ophthalmologist, who saw the patient on Sept. 25, 1991. Purportedly due to lack of patient cooperation, detailed visual acuity readings were not done. It was felt by the defendant ophthalmologist that the patient had pallor of the right optic nerve with vision at light perception only in the right eye. He recommended patching of the left eye, based on an assumption that the poor vision and optic nerve pallor on the right was congenital. His notes indicate that the patient should return in one month. The plaintiff and his mother returned to a different HMO ophthalmologist on Dec. 31, 1991. Pallor of the right optic nerve was noted again, with vision in that eye to be light perception only. Glasses were prescribed. The plaintiff returned to the same HMO ophthalmologist on Jan. 31, 1992. Pallor of the right and left optic nerve was noted. It was recommended that the child see the HMO pediatric ophthalmologist, however no appointment was available until early March 1992. On March 10, 1992, the plaintiff saw the HMO pediatric ophthalmologist. He ordered a CT scan, which revealed bilateral dilation of the optic nerve sheaths. By that time, vision had deteriorated in the child's left eye, as well. The plaintiff was referred by the HMO pediatric ophthalmologist to Dr. Mark Borchert, a pediatic neuro-ophthalmologist at Children's Hospital, Los Angeles. He performed bilateral optic nerve sheath fenestrations on the child, thereby stabilizing his vision. However, the child suffered irreversible vision loss. He has vision of light perception only in the right eye, and vision at approximately five feet in the left eye.The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants based on a medical malpractice theory of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $1,750,000. The defendant made a C.C.P. º998 offer of compromise for $400,000.
Specials in Evidence
$_______________ $_______________
Injuries
Legal blindness in a child who is now 9-years-old.
Other Information
The settlement was reached approximately four years and four months after the case was filed. Per plaintiff, the case settled after a voluntary settlement conference before John Bates, Esq. of JAMS/Endispute. A structured settlement was approved which will pay out $6.3 million over the child's lifetime.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390