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
Negligent Plastic Surgery, Lack of Informed Consent

Loretta Phipps v. Stuart Kincaid, M.D.

Published: Sep. 26, 2009 | Result Date: May 20, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 200800081939CUMM Verdict –  Defense

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

W. David Gurney


Defendant

Clark R. Hudson
(Neil Dymott Hudson, APLC)


Experts

Plaintiff

Irving Posalski, M.D.
(medical)

John M. Shannon
(medical)

Defendant

Marek Dobke
(medical)

Ted W. Gay
(medical)

Facts

Plaintiff Loretta Phipps contracted for multiple cosmetic surgical procedures including: complete abdominoplasty, coronal brow lift, and liposuction of the flanks, thighs, back, and abdomen. The procedures were performed by defendant Dr. Stuart Kincaid. Several days after the procedures, Phipps developed tissue necrosis and an infection for which she was admitted to the hospital and subjected to four operations. Her condition required debridement of the necrotic tissue.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Phipps claimed that Kincaid's conduct fell below the standard of care in a number of ways. By devascularizing too much tissue and/or placing the abdominal binder too tightly, Phipps claimed Kincaid caused the infection and necrosis. And, by failing to timely diagnosis the infection and necrosis, Phipps claimed more tissue debridement and grafting were required.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Kincaid claimed that his conduct was within the standard of care and that the infection Phipps experienced was atypical of an incision site. Kincaid further argued that the complications complained of were explained and fully consented to prior to the procedures.

Damages

Phipps sought $500,000 in general damages, and $50,000 for future medical expenses, including $30,000-$40,000 for future corrective surgeries.

Injuries

Phipps alleged that she suffered infection, debridement, and scarring. Her husband, also a party, claimed loss of consortium.

Result

Following two days of deliberation, the jury found that Kincaid was not negligent and that Phipps gave fully informed consent.

Deliberation

two days

Poll

9-3 (no negligence), 10-2 (informed consent)

Length

six days


#95453

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

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