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
Medical Malpractice

Juan Miguel Ayala, By and Through His Guardian Ad Litem Leticia Ayala v. William Isenberg, East Bay Perinatal Medical Associates, Janet Brown, Does 1 to 30 Inclusive

Published: Apr. 28, 2007 | Result Date: Feb. 3, 2006 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2002-065252 Verdict –  $1,600,000 net; ($1,830,000 gross)

Court

Alameda Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Marshall Silberberg
(Law Office of Marshall Silberberg)

Jin N. Lew


Defendant

Cyrus A. Tabari
(Sheuerman, Martini, Tabari, Zenere & Garvin APC)

David A. Depolo


Experts

Plaintiff

Joel Kramer
(medical)

Gene Bruno M.S., C.R.C., C.C.M., C.D.M.S.
(technical)

Carol R. Hyland M.A.
(medical)

O. Carter Snead III, M.D.
(medical)

Peter Formuzis Ph.D.
(technical)

Claimant

Mark Jacobs
(medical)

Defendant

Michael I. Katz
(Maschoff Brennan) (medical)

Andrew M. O'Brien
(technical)

Gordon Ulrey
(medical)

Joanna Moss
(technical)

Philip Sunshine
(medical)

Facts

Dr. William Isenberg used a vacuum technique to pull the fetus from a high position in Letitcia Ayala's birth canal. The vacuum detached from the fetus four times and Isenberg prepared to deliver the baby by C-section. However, the head descended, making delivery possible with one more pull of the vacuum. The baby plaintiff, Juan Ayala, became obtunded after birth and suffered from a subgaleal hematoma. Juan sued Isenberg for medical malpractice through his mother and guardian ad litem.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed the physician's standard of care for a fetus situated so high in the birth canal required either an immediate C-Section delivery or resort to a C-section directly after the third detachment of the vacuum from the fetus.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant contended the vacuum technique was an indicated technique to aid high canal births that could continue to be employed after the third detachment.

Damages

$5 million for future lost earnings and medical care; $250,000 for pain and suffering.

Injuries

Plaintiff's subgaleal hemorrhage caused hypovolemia and brain damage, resulting in cognitive defects and a very low intelligence quotient.

Result

Plaintiff. $1,830,000.

Other Information

Settled for $1.6 million after trial. Dr. Brown was dismissed by way of summary judgment before trial.

Deliberation

two days

Length

three weeks


#84046

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

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