Richard Banks, Deborah A. Staydohar, Linda Rigli v. Gregory C. Mohr, Myron L. Kamenetsky
Published: Apr. 13, 2004 | Result Date: Dec. 18, 2003 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: T020271C Verdict – $0
Judge
Court
Nevada Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Cynthia L. Garber
(Robinson Calcagnie Inc.)
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Richard Greengold
(medical)
Howard L. Dorne
(medical)
Darryl R. Zengler M.A.
(technical)
D. Preston Flanigan
(medical)
Defendant
Myron L. Kamenetsky
(medical)
David J. Fraser
(medical)
Gregory C. Mohr
(medical)
Daniel P. Link
(medical)
Facts
The plaintiffs' decedent, Felicia Banks, was referred to Gregory Mohr, an interventional radiologist at Tahoe Forest Hospital in Truckee. She was referred for purposes of undergoing an interventional radiology procedure to open a stenotic lesion in her left external iliac artery that had given rise to symptoms of claudication when walking. On May 3, 2001, Banks checked into TFH and was evaluated by the nurse. She then met Mohr, who obtained her informed consent and conducted a physical examination. Banks was transferred to the radiology suite, at which time a diagnostic aortogram was performed, which demonstrated extensive peripheral vascular disease in the aorta as well as the iliac arteries. It also illustrated the stenotic lesion in the left external iliac artery, which was the target of treatment. Catheters were then exchanged in order to place the balloon device for purposes of the angioplasty. Banks was administered 3,000 units of heparin at 10:25 a.m. The procedure went as expected and the lesion was cleared. At 10:55 a.m. it was discovered that she had a white or blanched right lower leg, which was cold to the touch. She complained of aches and stated that she was unable to move her legs. Mohr summoned Myron Kamenetsky, a vascular and interventional radiologist, who had assisted in the previous diagnostic arteriogram and angioplasty. Kamenetsky also evaluated the leg and found it to be pulseless at that time. Another diagnostic angiogram was performed, which disclosed significant clotting in the distal aorta and right common iliac artery, with a slight amount of clotting at the saddle of the iliac artery bifurcation. Mohr believed that this was an allergic reaction to the heparin, of unlike heparin-induced thrombocytopenia thrombosis (HIT/T). Since HIT/T was part of his differential diagnosis, he cleared the table on instruments containing heparin and decided to attack the clots with a thrombolytic solution tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). The doctors administered the tPA at 12:25 p.m. and saw some evidence of reperfusion of the right lower extremity after seven minutes. The continued the administration for about two-and one-half hours, then stopped the tPA in order to perform an evaluative angiogram. At that time, the angiogram disclosed that most of the previously-identified clot had been dissipated by the thrombolytic therapy. Mohr and Kamenetsky decided the best course of action would be to admit the patient to ICU and administer or drip tPA, in addition to refludan, a substitute anticoagulant, for the rest of the night. Upon performing another diagnostic arteriogram at 3:45 p.m. it was discovered that the patient was again developing a clot in the distal aorta, the right common iliac artery as well as the left common iliac artery. I was decided to exchange catheters and insert a McNamara infusion system in order to distribute tPA. This was accomplished and tPA began again at 5 p.m. At 6 p.m. Banks was transferred to intensive care for monitoring, The ICU nurses kept in contact with Mohr for the clotting function test results, after which he stopped the refludan for a period of time before restarting it at a lower dosage. In the early morning hours of May 4, Banks condition began to deteriorate. She showed evidence of kidney failure, persistent extremity pain, paralysis and mottling from her navel to her toes. By 7:15 a.m. Banks still had not regained perfusion of her lower extremities. She was transferred to Washoe Medical Center where Banks was evaluated by vascular surgeon Edward Plecha, who concluded that the only options available to her would be bilateral high amputation of the lower legs, with surgical exploration of the abdomen. Banks and her family declined this option. Banks died later that day. The decedents husband and daughters sued Mohr and Kamenetsky for medical malpractice and wrongful death.
Settlement Discussions
Plaintiffs made a demand of $325,000, reduced to $150,000 to each of the defendants. Mediation resulted in the proposed offer of $30,000 to settle the claims.
Damages
The plaintiffs claimed that they suffered the loss of the love, society, companionship and consortium of Felicia Banks. Also, Richard Banks claimed the loss of financial support through Felicia as well as the costs of replacement services for those provided by her. The plaintiffs requested an award of $258,000 in special damages, based upon the testimony of their economist, that the present value of the financial losses sustained by Richard Banks was $251,000 and the stipulation that the funeral and burial expenses were approximately $7,000. The plaintiffs also requested that the jury award no less than $250,000 in general damages and made arguments suggesting that general damages in the range of $1 million to $50 million would not be unreasonable.
Other Information
The first question in the special verdict form regarding Kamenetsky related to the plaintiffs' use of the " Doe Statute" (CCP Section 474), which states that when a plaintiff is ignorant of the name of a defendant, the plaintiff must state that fact in the complaint. When the name is discovered, the pleading or proceeding must be amended accordingly. The first question on the special verdict form also addressed the plaintiffs' use of the "Relation Back" doctrine, which allowed a claim asserted against a defendant in an amended filing to relate back to claims previously asserted against a co-defendant for statute of limitations purposes when the two defendants are united in interest. The jury found for Kamenetsky as to these issues, thereby negating the medical malpractice claim against him. The jury then found in favor of Mohr.
Deliberation
4.75 hours
Poll
9-3 (for Mohr on medical malpractice claim), 11-1 (for Manenetsky on statute of limitations)
Length
eight days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390