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.

Torts
Elder Abuse
Nursing Home Negligence

Michael Perlin, David Perlin, Elaine Crossley, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Helen Perlin v. Summit Care California Inc., et al.

Published: Jun. 10, 2006 | Result Date: Jul. 19, 2005 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: LC064201 Verdict –  $300,000

Judge

Richard B. Wolfe

Court

L.A. Superior Van Nuys


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Patricia Canner

Russell S. Balisok

Steven C. Wilheim


Defendant

Sarah Gates

William N. McMillan
(DeWitt Algorri & Algorri)

Susan Fox Jordan

Kippy L. Wroten


Experts

Plaintiff

Susan Campbell
(medical)

Martesa Alpert
(medical)

Lawrence Miller M.D.
(medical)

Defendant

Kevin M. Ehrhart M.D.
(medical)

Marcus Mettler
(medical)

Thomas L. Hedge Jr., M.D.
(medical)

Karen Josephson
(medical)

Frances Boughey
(medical)

Carl Bryant RN, CLNC
(medical)

Facts

The plaintiffs are Michael and David Perlin and Elaine Crossley. They sued individually and on behalf of the estate of their mother, Helen Perlin. In March 2002, Perlin was admitted to a nursing home called the Woodland Care Center. Before she was admitted to Woodland, Perlin had undergone knee replacement surgery. Further, she had been positioned on a continuous passive motion (CPM) machine to mobilize her knee joint. Perlin also suffered from a number of ailments. On March 19, she was moved to an acute care facility, where she later died.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs sued Woodland's parent company, defendant Summit Care-California Inc. They claimed negligence, willful misconduct, fraud, constructive fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, elder abuse and wrongful death.

The plaintiffs alleged that defendant's employees did not know how to properly secure the CPM machine and failed to monitor her condition, including the development of a large nicotic wound on her calf where it rubbed against a metal cross-bar on the EPM machine because it was improperly placed. Thus, Perlin sustained a friction ulcer that became necrotic and required debridement. Plaintiffs' expert nurses claimed that the CPM rubbed Perlin's leg so much that her tendon and bone were exposed.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Perlin's cause of death was not a friction ulcer, but an ongoing, peripheral vascular ulcer as a result of complications from the knee-replacement surgery. Perlin's medical records confirmed that she suffered from this condition before her admission to Woodland. At Woodland, the condition worsened. She was then moved to an acute care hospital, where she developed other ailments that led to her death. A defense expert, a geriatric doctor, illustrated the process in which Perlin's body had broken down, producing the foundation for a vascular ulcer to grow. Further, the trauma of the surgery restricted blood flow. As a result, Perlin's tissue was deprived of nutrients, which led to the ulcer.

A physical therapist claimed that the CPM machine was properly used. Further, the treatment Perlin received at Woodland was appropriate and met professional standards.

Damages

Plaintiffs claimed $1 million for abuse/neglect. They sought $350,000 for wrongful death.

Injuries

Perlin suffered from a left posterior calf ulcer, cellulitis, pneumonia, malnourishment and dehydration. She died from pneumonia.

Result

In regard to fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, intentional infliction of emotional distress and wrongful death, defendant was found not liable. However, it was found liable for elder abuse/neglect after the jury found neglect and recklessness by clear & convincing evidence, and causation by a preponderance of the evidence. The question of causation by clear & convincing evidence was submitted to the jury, but they failed to reach a consensus on that issue. Accordingly, plaintiffs were awarded $300,000. In regard to the constructive fraud charge, the jury did not come to a consensus. The court thus ordered a mistrial on that claim and later dismissed the constructive fraud cause of action.

Other Information

Following a post-trial motion, the judge remitted the award to $250,000. The remaining fraud claims, including the constructive fraud claim, were dismissed by the court. Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees in the amount of approximately $781,000 remains pending before the trial court. Plaintiffs, as well as defendants, are each considering an appeal.

Deliberation

six days

Poll

10-2 (on issue of elder abuse)

Length

seven weeks


#94422

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

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