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
Failure to Monitor

Marie Steinisch v. Ukiah Valley Medical Center, Adventist Health System/West, Arthur Kugel, M.D.

Published: Jun. 12, 2010 | Result Date: Mar. 24, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: SCUK CVPO 0697122 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Mendocino Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Douglas C. Fladseth
(Law Office Douglas Fladseth)


Defendant

Thomas A. Cregger
(Cregger & Chalfant LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Denise Navillier
(medical)

Norman Panting
(medical)

James Andolsen
(medical)

James Olcese
(medical)

Rachel Hawk
(technical)

Lynn MacLoud
(medical)

Ronald S. Katz
(medical)

Defendant

Ralph J. Kiernan
(medical)

Nancy Heitshew
(medical)

Joseph Silva
(medical)

Facts

Plaintiff Marie Steinisch was admitted to Ukiah Valley Medical Center for a broken patella repair on March 10, 2005. At the time of surgery, she was already being treated with methadone for chronic pain and, after surgery, she was moved to the regular floor. Approximately three and a half hours later, Steinisch suffered cardiopulmonary arrest and was revived, but suffered an anoxic brain injury.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Steinisch filed suit against Ukiah Valley, its owner, and her doctor for medical malpractice, alleging she should have been on electronic monitoring. She contended that orders by the surgeon for post-recovery oxygen and a preoperative EKG were not followed. Steinisch contended that, although the recovery room nurses noted a cardiac arrythmia called ventricular fibrillation and reportedly advised the surgeon and anesthesiologist, no one told the attending physician who was following Steinisch when she went to the medical-surgical floor. Furthermore, Steinisch contended that the recovery room nurse failed to fulfill his obligation to give a full report to the receiving nurse who had no idea about this life threatening venticular fibrillation. Because of this failure, Steinisch alleged, the receiving nurse did not make any extra effort to closely monitor the cardiac condition much less the vital signs. Steinisch contended that it was only after she "crashed" that the ventricular fibrillation was confirmed on a follow up cardiac monitor.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defense contended that monitoring was a decision for the physician, that a recorded ventricular fibrillation was misread by monitor equipment, and that Steinisch's arrhythmias were reported to her physicians. The defense further argued Steinisch did not suffer injury besides the lack of post-recovery oxygen and preoperative EKG.

Injuries

Steinisch claimed she suffered anoxic brain injury resulting in memory and cognitive problems. She further stated she was in a rehabilitation facility and fell while there.

Result

The jury found that defendants were negligent but did not find the necessary link on causation.

Deliberation

three hours

Poll

9-3 (negligence), 9-3 (causation)

Length

nine days


#94288

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

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