Facts

As a result of giving birth to her son, Gohar Arzumanyan, 31, suffered a third degree vaginal tear according to her obstetrician, defendant Armineh Tavitian. According to Tavitian, she successfully treated the tear. Plaintiff was subsequently referred to Simon Keushkerian, M.D. Keushkerian determined that Arzumanyan suffered from a rectovaginal fistula. Thereafter, Petar Vukasin, M.D. made three unsuccessful attempts to repair the fistula. Finally, Schlomo Raz, M.D. managed to improve the damage by repairing the rectovaginal fistula. Arzumanyan filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Tavitian.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the defendant acted negligently when she stitched the plaintiff's rectal mucosa after determining that she had suffered a tear. This caused the rectovaginal fistula.

Dr. Tavitian testified that she repaired the third degree tear in the "usual fashion." Plaintiff contended that in repairing a third degree tear in the usual fashion a physician does not penetrate into the rectal mucosa, but Dr. Tavitian did place a stitch through the rectal mucosa and into the rectum, thereafter leading to the recto-vaginal fistula. Within one week of the repair, plaintiff consulted an independent obstetrician and gynecologist, Dr. Violet Boodaghian, who performed a rectal examination and testified she felt the stitch in the rectum.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that she did not cause the plaintiff's injury. The defendant's position, which was supported by expert testimony, was that she never placed a stitch in the plaintiff's rectal mucosa as the plaintiff alleged. The defense challenged the plaintiff's claim for damages, claiming the plaintiff was not entitled to damages for her household expenses claim because she actually suffered no such damages. In addition, the defense argued that taking into account her employment as a real estate agent, the plaintiff's lost earnings and benefits amounted to $63,362.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff demanded $240,000 and the defendant offered $75,000.

Specials in Evidence

$4,093. The plaintiff, who was an accountant prior to the incident, lost her job. She claimed lost wages in the amount of $66,474. She also sought $6,108 for lost benefits. In an effort earn employment in a different occupation, the plaintiff obtained her real estate license.

Damages

The plaintiff sought damages for pain and suffering. She also sought $25,494 for losses associated with services she provided in her household. The plaintiff's husband sought damages for loss of consortium.

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered a rectovaginal fistula.

Result

Defense verdict.

Other Information

According to plaintiff, Dr. Tavitian testified that she repaired the third degree laceration without violating the rectal mucosa. Defendant's expert witness, Dr. Steven Hartford, testified that violating the rectal mucosa while repairing a third degree laceration constitutes care below the standard of care, and that, on the basis of Dr. Tavitian's testimony that she repaired the tear in the usual fashion, he could conclude that Dr. Tavitian had not breached the standard of care. He further speculated that Dr. Boodaghian's ability to palpate the stitch in the rectum within one week of the repair was caused by tissue erosion. According to plaintiff, the original jury poll was 8-4, ultimately culminating in the 10-2 decision.

Deliberation

one hour

Poll

10-2

Length

six days