Cyndi Gullett and Clay Gullett v. Desert Valley Medical Group
Published: Jul. 25, 1998 | Result Date: Mar. 17, 1998 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: VCV006169 Verdict – $1,775,000
Judge
Court
San Bernardino Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
John R. MacRill Jr.
(Davis, Grass, Goldstein & Finlay)
Experts
Plaintiff
Kendall S. Wagner M.D.
(medical)
George A. Macer Jr., M.D.
(medical)
Jeffrey E. Galpin M.D.
(medical)
Defendant
Stephen Uman
(medical)
Phillip J. Kanter
(medical)
Facts
Plaintiff, Cyndi Gullet, a brittle diabetic then in her mid-40s consulted with defendant Dr. Hopp at defendant Desert Valley Medical Group in 1993. Defendant Hopp diagnosed plaintiff as having bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and suggested that plaintiff undergo carpal tunnel releases at separate times. Defendant Hopp decided not to provide plaintiff with any pre-operative or intra-operative antibiotics because plaintiff reported that she was allergic to a variety of antibiotics. In November 1993, defendant Hopp performed a carpal tunnel release on plaintiff's dominant left wrist. Plaintiff had an uneventful recovery as she felt well within a few days, only had slight swelling and was only caused to use pain medication on an intermittent basis. In January 1994, defendant Hopp performed carpal tunnel release on plaintiff's non-dominant right wrist. Again, defendant Hopp did not provide plaintiff with any pre-operative or intra-operative antibiotics. For the few days following the surgery, plaintiff's recovery was similar to what she had experienced with the earlier carpal tunnel release. However, approximately three days post-operatively, plaintiff began to experience a significant increase in pain and quite a bit more swelling than previously experienced. Plaintiff took the prescribed pain medication, Vicodin, which had in the past alleviated her pain. However, the ingestion of Vicodin did not relieve the pain that plaintiff was then experiencing. During the weekend, plaintiff called the Urgent Care for defendant Desert Valley Medical Group and talked with a physician covering for defendant Hopp. The on-call physician prescribed Lorcet for pain and advised plaintiff to contact defendant Hopp first thing Monday morning. Plaintiff was only provided a modicum of relief when she doubled the dosage of Lorcet. Plaintiff called defendant Hopp on Monday morning. Plaintiff relayed to defendant Hopp's nurse that she was having problems and was in a great deal of pain. The nurse put plaintiff on hold and returned to the phone indicating that defendant Hopp advised that he would see her at her scheduled appointment on Wednesday, two days thereafter. Due to increasing pain, plaintiff called defendant Hopp's office again Monday afternoon. Again, defendant's nurse put plaintiff on hold and upon returning the phone reiterated that defendant Hopp would see plaintiff at the scheduled appointment of Wednesday. Plaintiff was finally able to see defendant Hopp on Wednesday, Feb. 2, 1994. Plaintiff reported that she was in a great deal of pain and that her hand burned and that her fingers were going numb. Plaintiff's sutures were removed. Defendant Hopp's office note reflected significant swelling of the entire hand wound separation. Defendant Hopp put plaintiff on Cipro, an antibiotic. Plaintiff returned to defendant Hopp on Friday, Feb. 4. Defendant Hopp advised plaintiff to continue with the Cipro and to soak her hand. Plaintiff was admitted to St. Mary's Desert Hospital on Saturday, Feb. 5. Plaintiff was eventually diagnosed with a severe infection, necrotizing fascitis, which caused significant and severe damage to plaintiff's right hand and arm requiring plaintiff to under to numerous operative procedures. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on negligence. Plaintiff husband sued for loss of consortium.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff wife made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $244,999; plaintiff husband made a C.C.P. º998 demand for $74,999.
Specials in Evidence
$ ______ approximately ? $89,000 $ _______ approximately $89,000
Injuries
The plaintiff alleged nerve damage to her fourth and fifth fingers, contractures and limited use and movement of the forearm, wrist, hand and fingers. The plaintiff has severe scarring and has undergone skin grafting from her hand up to her forearm.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately two years and 11 months after the case was filed. Numerous settlement conferences were held, resulting in no settlement. The case trailed in Victorville for quite sometime before being transferred to Central. Defendants successfully moved to reduce the amount of future medical expenses. The jury awarded $250,000 although plaintiff's expert had testified that such amount was approximately $85,000. The judge granted the motion fixing the amount of future medical expenses at $89,000. Judgment was prepared reflecting the plaintiff wife's general damages at $250,000 (reduced due to MICRA), plaintiff wife's future special damages at $89,900, plaintiff husband's general damages at $75,000, as well as costs in the amount of $33,181.50 and interest accruing at the rate of $44,798.15 per annum from April 28, 1997.
Deliberation
½ day
Length
two weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390