Facts

The 30-year-old plaintiff had a piece of metal fly into his abdomen while using a hammer and a chisel on Jan. 4, 2003. He was taken to East Los Angeles Doctors Hospital and was evaluated by Dr. Shamaan. It was thought that the piece of metal was in the abdominal wall. Two days later. Dr. Shamaan performed a local exploration with MAC anesthesia. Due to the fact that he was unable to find the foreign body and the fact that the patient began vomiting, he closed the procedure.

The patient was discharged on Jan. 8, 2003. On Jan. 17, 2003, the patient presented to Martin Luther King Hospital with a fever of 104, a white blood count of 16,000 tachycardia and abdominal pain. He was taken for an exploratory laparotomy and it was noted that he had a defect in his fascia and that the cecum was incarcerated into the fascial defect. It was thought that the cecum was suturated into the defect. The cecum was reduced, the fascial deficit fixed and the patient was discharged from Martin Luther King Hospital five days later. The patient has developed a hernia in the midline of the laparotomy incision which needs repair.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that the foreign body in the abdominal wall posed absolutely no risk and therefore the local exploration was not indicated. Plaintiff also contended that the local exploration was performed negligently and that Dr. Shamaan inadvertently sutured the cecum to the abdominal wall during his exploration.

Plaintiff contended that the cecum being sutured to the abdominal wall caused a partial obstruction which led to the symptoms that prompted the surgery at Martin Luther King Hospital.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant contended that the surgery was elective, that the plaintiff wanted the surgery and that it was reasonable to proceed with the surgery given that it was a local exploration with minor risks. Defendant also contended that he did not sture the cecum, and rather that the foreign body caused the defect in the fascia and that the cecum bulged through, because it adhesed over two weeks. Additionally, defendant contended that although the operative note at Martin Luther King Hospital stated that they identified a suture in the cecum, it was anatomically impossible that he could have sutured the cecum given the location of his incision and the instruments he utilized.

Specials in Evidence

$12,000.

Result

Defense verdict.

Deliberation

one hour

Poll

12-0

Length

six days