Stephen and Karen Mickey v. S. Mansoor Shah, M.D.
Published: Dec. 10, 1994 | Result Date: Nov. 8, 1994 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: VC010951 – $800,000
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Norwalk
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Randolph M. Even
(ADR Services Inc.)
Marshall Silberberg
(Law Office of Marshall Silberberg)
Experts
Plaintiff
Alan Nutkiewicz
(medical)
Howard R. Krauss
(medical)
Barry D. Pressman M.D.
(medical)
Robert W. Rand
(medical)
Raymond G. Schultz
(technical)
Jeremy Cole
(medical)
F. Warren Lovell M.D.
(medical)
Defendant
Martin H. Weiss M.D.
(medical)
Thompson Adams
(medical)
Howard Lester Worcester M.D.
(medical)
Richard W. Davis
(medical)
Dennis R. Malkasian
(medical)
Facts
In July of 1983, Plaintiff Stephen Mickey, a 28-year-old tire salesman suffered a grand mal seizure and was admitted to Doctors Hospital in Lakewood under the care and supervision of Defendant John Chew, M.D. Dr. Chew ordered a CT scan of Plaintiff's head, which showed a non-enhancing low density area of moderate size in the right frontal region. The radiologist reported that a non-enhancing neoplasm was not excluded. Dr. Chew started Mr. Mickey on Dilantin for seizure control, but did no further workup or evaluation of the patient's lesion prior to discharge. Dr. Chew's records indicate that he had a plan for Plaintiff to return in 6 months for a follow-up CT scan and to possibly obtain a neurological consult. Dr. Chew did not obtain a repeat scan, as planned, until more than one year later. Plaintiff switched to Defendant S. Mansoor Shah, M.D., in August of 1984, who continued his medical care until June of 1990. At some point in time, Dr. Shah obtained the medical records of Dr. Chew and Doctors Hospital of Lakewood. During this 6-year interval, Dr. Shah did not obtain a follow-up CT scan, as was Dr. Chew's plan for the patient. In January of 1991, Plaintiff's insurance was switched to Huntington Medical Group, Inc. In January of 1991, Plaintiff began to experience head and neck pain and was referred by Huntington physicians to physical therapy. Thereafter, Plaintiff began to experience visual deficits and was seen by an optometrist on July 27, 1991, who diagnosed papilledema and referred Plaintiff immediately to Foothill Presbyterian ER where he was diagnosed with a brain tumor in the same area as abnormality had appeared on the 1983 CT scan. The bulk of the tumor was removed during 2 surgeries in 1991. Defendant Huntington Medical Group, Inc., settle out during trial for a confidential amount.
Settlement Discussions
Plaintiff contends his demand was $250,000 and Defendants offered nothing. Defendant Chew contends he offered $200,000; Shaw offered nothing; and Plaintiff's demand was flexible. Defendant Shaw contends Plaintiff made 998 demands in the amount of $1,000,000 as to Steven Mickey and $100,000 as to Karen Mickey; Co-defendant Dr. Chew offered $200,000 prior to trial and $250,000 (disputed by Plaintiff) during trial; and there was no authority or consent on behalf of Dr. Shah.
Specials in Evidence
not in evidence $1,200,000
Damages
Plaintiff asked the jury to award $500,000 to himself and $500,000 to his spouse for loss of consortium.
Injuries
The pathology from the surgeries revealed a grade IV astrocytoma (glioblastoma multiform). Although his prognosis is uncertain, Plaintiff has received MRI's and PET scans which have shown no recurrence; residual decreased life expectancy and visual diminution. Plaintiff's wife claimed loss of consortium.
Result
Plaintiff's verdict was $800,000 in general damages as to Steven Mickey; there were no future lost earnings awarded; there were no damages awarded to Karen Mickey. The $800,000 verdict was against Dr. Shah (subject to MICRA and possible offset for settlement). Defendant Chew received a Defense verdict. (9-3).
Other Information
Co-defendant Huntington Medical Group settled out during trial for a confidential amount. Dr. Shah was found 44% responsible for Plaintiff's general damages; as such, the verdict was reduced by Judge Higa on November 18, 1994, to $110,000 ($250,000 per MICRA times 44% pr Proposition 51). The case as to Dr. Shah had previously been subject to binding arbitration pursuant to a Court order enforcing an arbitration contract between Dr. Shah and Plaintiff. However Plaintiffs brought a motion in front of the Superior Court requesting that the arbitration agreement be revoked and the case reinstated to the Superior Court. Judge Lois Anderson Smaltz granted Plaintiffs' motion. Defendant Shah Petitioned the Second District Court of Appeal for a Writ of Mandate/Prohibition. This Writ was rejected by the Court of Appeal. Then, Defendant Shah Petitioned the Supreme Court of the State of California for Review. The California Medical Association, California Dental Association, and the California Association of Hospital and Health Care Systems filed Amicus Curiae briefs in support of review. Plaintiffs submitted written opposition and the Supreme Court denied review and ordered Dr. Shah to appear for trial.
Deliberation
4 days
Poll
9-3
Length
3 weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390