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
Lack of Informed Consent

Sherry Higgins v. Jeffrey Ashley, M.D.

Published: Jun. 2, 2007 | Result Date: Mar. 20, 2007 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: EC041185 Verdict –  Defense

Court

L.A. Superior Burbank


Attorneys

Plaintiff

James J. Filicia
(Law Office of James J Filicia)


Defendant

Kevin P. Hillyer


Experts

Plaintiff

Markus B. Willoughby
(Willoughby Law Firm Inc.) (medical)

Peter F. Lawrence
(medical)

Defendant

David Woodley
(medical)

David V. Cossman
(medical)

Facts

On Jan. 6, 2004, defendant dermatologist performed a 3 mm punch biopsy on the plaintiff’s right medial ankle. The defendant believed that the plaintiff may have a Kaposi’s sarcoma, a malignant tumor of the connective tissue, which can metastasize into systemic cancer. The plaintiff, age 61, denied that she received informed consent for the procedure.

Because of the plaintiff’s undiagnosed underlying venous stasis, the biopsy site did not heal and evolved into a 10+ mm ulcer, which ultimately required pressure casting and ultimate vascular surgery. The delay in healing was approximately two years.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF’S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that punch biopsy of the distal extremity was not indicated for several reasons. First, she claimed that the lesions observed by Dr. Ashley were easily recognizable as lesions of venous stasis and not characteristic of a rare malignancy. The plaintiff claimed that she informed the defendant of her vascular compromise and was not given informed consent.

Peter Lawrence, M.D., the plaintiff’s subsequent treating vascular surgeon, testified that the lesions were easily recognizable as benign lesions of venous stasis and that biopsy was contraindicated.

DEFENDANT’S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that the lesions were consistent with potential malignancy, which required biopsy and histological examination. The defendant contended that he gave the patient informed consent and that the patient was non-compliant with wound care. Further, the defendant contended that regardless of the patient’s vascular compromise, biopsy was required.

Settlement Discussions

Prior to trial, the plaintiff made a C.C.P. Section 998 demand of $29,999.99. The defendant made a C.C.P. Section 998 offer of a dismissal in exchange for waiver of costs and malicious prosecution.

Damages

$30,000

Injuries

Two-year delay in healing of punch biopsy site resulting in pressure casting and multiple venous surgeries.

Other Information

The defendant agreed to waive cost and malicious prosecution in exchange for waiver of appeal.

Deliberation

one day

Poll

11-1 (standard of care), 10-2 (informed consent)

Length

six days


#98547

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

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