Orlando Injury Lawyer Blog

Gentamicin can completely or partially destroy the inner ear, or vestibular system. It is this destruction that leads, directly or indirectly, to most of the symptoms of gentamicin poisoning. Gentamicin can also cause kidney damage. As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers, we have seen terrible cases of gentamicin poisoning. Indeed, in one gentamicin poisoning case tried in Orlando, we obtained one of the largest verdicts in the United States.

The most common symptoms of gentamicin poisoning are ringing or hissing in the ears (tinnitus); bouncing vision (oscillopsia); difficulty with balance or walking; a sensation that the room is spinning (vertigo); and nausea. Individuals receiving gentamicin should be aware of these potential symptoms, so that they may report them to their healthcare providers immediately.

Sadly, physicians and nurses often dismiss complaints of “feeling dizzy” in gentamicin patients who are bed-bound to a condition known as orthostatic hypotension. Orthostatic hypotension is feeling faint when getting up from a lying position. It is due to blood pooling in the legs. Feeling faint, or being close to losing consciousness, is different than feeling dizzy, where the room spins, or where it is hard to keep balance when walking.

After leaving the hospital or being released by the home healthcare agency, the symptoms of gentamicin poisoning continue. Additionally, individuals often begin to suffer mental confusion, difficulty with short-term memory, and tiredness. In many cases, gentamicin poisoning and injury were caused by negligence on the part of a doctor, hospital, home health agency and/or pharmacist. That is why we will continue to seek just results for individuals who needlessly suffer from gentamicin poisoning and injury.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando injury lawyers handling pharmacy malpractice claims we found a recent report of pharmacy malpractice quite tragic. The incident involved a pharmacist who filled a prescription that led to the death of a Florida boy. Despite the magnitude of the loss the pharmacist will only pay a $1,000 fine, according to the agreement approved by the state board. As part of the same agreement with the Florida Board of Pharmacy, Edna Irizarry must also attend an eight-hour pharmacy course and pay about $2,460 in investigation costs.

Irizarry faced disciplinary action for processing a prescription for 3-year-old Sebastian Ferrero, who died in October 2007. Ferrero died two days after a routine test was supposed to help doctors determine why the boy’s growth was below average. Instead of receiving the prescribed dose of 5.75 grams of the amino acid arginine, officials said the Hospital Outpatient Pharmacy gave him more than 60 grams.

Understandably, the little boy's family found the action by the State of Florida to be inadequate. How can this slap on the wrist have any meaning when this malpractice and recklessness caused the death of an innocent child? Certainly, such insignificant action by the boards that regulate medicine and pharmacy have proven that individuals must act themselves to receive any justice for medical or pharmacy malpractice. Refusing to be discouraged, the family started a foundation in the hopes of preventing similar future tragedies.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Tim Russert’s death has reminded us that heart disease and heart attack is a major health risk. As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers, we see many heart attack cases. Some people, like Tim Russert, receive no warning sign, the medical personnel do all that they can and unfortunately the person dies from the heart attack. In those situations, we share with the families who seek our help, that no medical malpractice occurred-that the health care providers did all that anyone could have expected.

The most tragic circumstances I find are where the patient needlessly dies from a heart attack. I have seen too many heart attack cases where the signs and symptoms of the heart attack were obvious-yet the diagnosis is missed or no timely treatment is provided. At Orlando Regional Medical Center and Florida Hospital, patients coming into the emergency department with classic cardiac complaints of chest pain, shortness of breath or abnormal electrocardiograms are not always properly diagnosed and treated.

When Orlando residents are fortunate enough to have the signs and symptoms of a heart attack and get to Orlando Regional Medical Center or Florida Hospital, they should receive appropriate and timely care. When they do not, these hospitals should acknowledge their wrongdoing. Sadly, they do not. Instead, like other health care providers, these hospitals try to make excuses to escape responsibility.

In medical malpractice cases, no patient stands a fighting chance unless they have a lawyer who specializes in medical malpractice and has a long history of trial success. These cases rarely settle quickly, if at all. When going up against Orlando Regional Medical Center or Florida Hospital, patients and their families must be prepared to go to war!

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

An injury lawsuit we recently came across claims that a patient fell off his doctor’s exam table because the staff failed to provide assistance. As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers, this unfortunate incident is a reminder that patient must look after their own interests. In today’s healthcare industry, busy medical practices are not immune from accidents.

Whether this lawsuit fairly seeks to hold the medical clinic responsible is yet to be seen. There are many important facts that have not yet been disclosed. While we have represented patients who were injured when medical or hospital staff failed to protect them from falls, some patients should be expected to step down from an examination table without much difficulty.

Among the relevant issues in these cases are the age of the patient, the general health and condition of the patient, the height of the table, as well as the length of time the patient was lying down before trying to move off the table. Certainly, patients should be able to expect a helping hand or proper supervision where needed.

In this medical malpractice case the patient claims significant orthopedic injury from his fall. Whether there was any fault on the part of the medical staff in this case, the patient went to his doctor for help with one condition and left with many more medical problems.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers we have found that too many innocent patients could have avoided injury from medical malpractice had they been less forgiving of their doctor’s obvious shortcomings. Often patients see red flags at their doctor’s office yet fail to find a different doctor. This becomes tragic when medical malpractice follows a series of signs that were simply ignored. So, we have found the following three steps to positively assist patients in finding the right doctor.

Interview-Just as you would with any other professional, interview your doctor. Make an appointment to meet and chat with a doctor that you are considering to care for you or your family. Or go for a first visit that involves a minor problem “to see what you think.” You do not want to be blindly choosing a doctor when you have a serious medical condition.

Check them out on the Internet-People can easily Google or Yahoo! Any doctor they are considering. Within a few minutes you may find the doctor’s website, news stories about him, good or bad, and there are websites with objective information, including medical malpractice information. Evaluate his training and board certification at the American Medical Association’s website. Several Web sites such as RateMDs.com and HealthGrades.com also have doctor ratings.

Check out the staff- Remember, you're not just choosing a doctor. You're choosing his staff as well. They're more important than you might think. When you're feeling desperately ill, you're at their mercy to squeeze you into a packed schedule. A good doctor who has a rude receptionist, sloppy nurse, or careless assistant spells trouble and frustration.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Florida limits the amount of damages in medical malpractice cases to compensate for injury and death. Of course, this effects no one unless they suffer from a serious injury due to medical malpractice. Unfortunately, when that happens most of our clients are dismayed and shocked that our state legislature determined arbitrary values for the loss of one’s health or life.

Recently, an Orlando circuit court judge found these limits in medical malpractice cases to be unconstitutional. However, it will take some time for Florida appellate courts to consider this issue. Meanwhile it is interesting to note that few Floridians are aware of these limitations or that organizations such as the exist which have spent decades backing state and federal legislation to prevent innocent injury victims to have a jury consider the real value of their injury claims.

According to legal scholars the pendulum is moving even more pro-defendant in recent years. This of course is happening because big corporations, the insurance industry and the medical associations have used scare tactics to take away the people’s right to full and fair justice. Unfortunately, as Orlando injury lawyers, we know that corporate America will continue to work to deprive citizens of their right to hold corporation accountable; rather, than working harder to keep people safe in the first place.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Many folks are afraid of dentists, but few would expect their dentists to dance their way into their sinus cavity. As Orlando malpractice lawyers we were amazed at the report of a dentist dancing to the song “Car Wash” while he was extracting a patient’s tooth. In the process, he lost the inch-long drill bit, which punctured the patient’s sinus cavity and came to rest by her eye socket, according to her lawsuit.

The patient underwent emergency surgery when her dentist was unable to remove the drill bit. Following the surgery, the woman continues to suffer facial swelling, nerve damage and has chronic infections because of the bacteria that seeped into her sinus cavity.

This dental malpractice case began when the patient went to her dentist for pain in a molar started getting worse. An exposed nerve made it sensitive to heat and cold and a root canal had been ruled out as a possible option, according to her lawsuit. The dentist gave her some novocaine and while he was drilling to break the molar into quadrants before the extraction, the patient heard a snapping sound. All the while according to her lawyer, the dentist was dancing to the beat of the song on the radio in the dental office.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Medical malpractice happens often enough, but the circumstances surrounding some malpractice cases demonstrates the lack of any concern for human life. Here, a 43 year old woman died of a perforated bowel after writhing in pain on the floor in an emergency department for 45 minutes as hospital employees refused to help her. Rather than try to assist her, this patient was discharged and left on a bench outside the hospital screaming in pain.

County officers who were called to respond took the woman back inside and tried to get a nurse to help, but according to the police report, the nurse did not show any concern. Officers then made a computer check and found that the patient was wanted for a parole violation. As the officers put her in a wheelchair to handle the outstanding violation, the woman became unresponsive and died in the emergency room.

The woman’s family appears justified in claiming that their mother was not treated like a human being-that she was treated like an animal. Obviously, more folks need to understand that all of us must hold these hospitals accountable for such disregard for human life. Otherwise, there is no deterrent to such reckless conduct. As a footnote, the hospital is being downsized into an urgent care center after failing to meet federal standards for patient care.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando injury lawyers a recent medical malpractice verdict is another wake-up call for unsuspecting health care consumers. In this case, the patient, a middle-age, active man went to the emergency room after experiencing chest pain and collapsing at his home. At the hospital, the attending doctor prescribed acid-reflux medication and sent him home an hour later. When the patient saw his regular doctor two days later, he was diagnosed with a heart infection. Unfortunately, the patient had neither stomach upset nor an infection. Rather, he had an aortic rupture, a tear in the heart's major artery and died two days later.

The lawsuit highlighted the sad truth that this death was preventable had proper, timely health care been provided. Of course, it took a month long trial, before the jury was permitted to deliberate. Fortunately, the jury agreed that folks are entitled to better health care than what this patient received and awarded the family compensation for the significant economic losses that result when the family bread-winner is taken from them.

As a footnote to this verdict, the state Department of Health investigated the medical care and found no violation of the standard of care. The state closed its investigation more than a year before the medical malpractice trial began. This simply reinforces the importance of health care consumers protecting themselves and when serious injury results-to hold careless doctors accountable for their actions.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

A Florida doctor charged with medical malpractice and disciplinary allegations by the state faces a panel of peers who will examine his alleged mishandling of more than 10 cases, including what court documents describe as ''numerous patients deaths.'' However, the proceedings are secret. The public can't attend. When the panel reaches a decision, that, too, will be secret. If the peers decide against their report will go only to state regulators, who will conduct more closed hearings.

Even as state and local governments boast about how they are making healthcare information more available to the public, expanding websites with tons of data on hospitals and pricing, this case involving surgeon Alex Zakharia shows how much about a doctor's performance still remains hidden.

In 2004, Florida voters passed a constitutional amendment giving the public access to knowledge about botched care -- including the results of hearings like this one. But the amendment has been mired in court cases. Very little, if any, information has reached the public.

Sidney M. Wolfe, a physician with the Washington-based Public Citizen consumer group, says the healthcare industry often protects physicians. ``Doctors like to protect other doctors.''
Because problem doctors frequently slip from state to state or hospital to hospital, a federal law established the National Practitioner Data Bank, which compiles doctors' disciplinary actions, large malpractice judgments and hospital dismissals. That broad data bank is available only to select healthcare professionals. The public is denied access.

While most people want to believe and trust doctors, it is obvious that there are some who do not deserve such trust. Sadly, the medical association has such clout in Tallahassee and nation-wide that health care consumers may never have access to the information they need to be able to make an informed decision about the doctor they choose. Of course, this only hurts consumers and the majority of good doctors.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical negligence lawyers, we must prove that our client’s received negligent or substandard medical care and suffered damages as a result. The standard of care which applies is a national one. Other states, however, continue to cling to the rule that the injured medical malpractice claimant must prove a violation of a local standard of care. That the defendant failed to do what others in the community would have done.

Throughout these states a movement is slowly building to abolish century-old medical malpractice laws that judge a doctor's performance by the medical standards existing in the physician's community. Those laws, known as "locality rules," are still on the books in 21 states. They were originally designed to protect rural doctors who lacked access to medicines and training available in big cities. But plaintiff lawyers, courts, medical professionals and a handful of legislators are calling for their demise, arguing that all present-day doctors -- regardless of where they live and practice -- have equal access to quality training and the latest medicines, and should therefore be held to the same standards.

Critics claim that locality rules unfairly dictate who gets to testify in medical malpractice cases. Plaintiffs lawyers dislike them because they mandate that only locals can be used as expert witnesses -- a tough feat in small towns where doctors are reluctant to testify against colleagues. Some judges have said the rules unfairly disqualify otherwise qualified medical experts.

Proponents of locality rules argue that they are still a necessity, particularly to insulate doctors in rural areas that have limited medical resources available. Locality rules take that into account and shield them from liability.

Locality rules vary from state to state. For example, Idaho and New York use the strictest rule, known as the "same community" standard, which bases the standard of care on what doctors in the same town are doing. Three states -- Arizona, Virginia and Washington -- use a statewide standard of care. Eleven states, including Michigan, Illinois and North Carolina, use a "same or similar community" standard, which allows for out-of-state doctors to testify in malpractice cases if they can show that their medical community standards are similar to the defendant's.

For the sake of health care consumers everywhere, these locality rules should be abolished. Medicine is no longer practiced in isolation. Doctors can stay current with their practice or specialty by simply going online. What’s more, for most cases, there is no reason why a patient in one state should be entitled to better care than one in a different state.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Medical malpractice may well be the fifth-leading cause of death in the United States according to the Millennium Research Group (MRG). This global authority on medical technology market intelligence has conducted a detailed and thorough analysis of the acute care clinical information systems (CIS) market and finds that a major driver in the US is the demand for improvement in patient safety.

Medical errors are the fifth-leading cause of deaths in the US, with up to 98,000 deaths annually. According to the new report entitled US Markets for Acute Care Clinical Information Systems, hospitals are adopting CIS to help them provide adequate, timely care and reduce the frequency of preventable errors.

Medical errors in the healthcare system arise from miscommunication, physician order transcription errors, adverse drug events, or incomplete patient medical records. Generally, medical errors are caused by overcrowded, understaffed clinical areas with complex workflow patterns, and incomplete or inefficient communication between clinical areas. Through the use of a CIS, professionals within each clinical area are able to access and use information pertinent to a patient's medical profile and history. As a result, CIS can effectively help prevent errors and enhance patient safety.

The CIS market -- comprised of radiology information systems, pharmacy and medication management information systems, cardiovascular and cardiology information systems, laboratory information systems, emergency department information systems, and critical care information systems -- was valued at over $900 million in 2005. By 2010, revenues in the CIS market will exceed $1.5 billion.

A CIS is a computer-based inpatient information system designed for collecting, storing, manipulating, and making available clinical information that is important to the health care delivery process. It provides access to a patient's electronic medical record-clinical data storage technology that encodes the patient's previous medical history, responses to medication, test results, and current treatment. Certainly, every reasonable technological advance which increases patient safety should be considered. Too many medical malpractice cases result from errors that were easily avoidable.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

A medical malpractice jury in Broward County awarded more than $2 million to a woman who had been a ballerina for 15 years and had a bright future ahead of her. Unfortunately, this teenager Katie Shreffler began to suffer pain in her hip, and underwent surgery. Ten years later, this South Florida woman is still in pain, walks with a crutch and has needed more surgery to correct the damage from the original procedure, according to court records.

Interestingly, the surgeon has become a prominent and well-respected physician. Dr. Marc Philippon, according to his clinic's website, is ''one of the world's leading orthopaedic hip surgeons'' and a consultant to all the major U.S. professional sports leagues. He has treated pro golfers Greg Norman and Peter Jacobsen, hockey player Mario Lemieux, pro football player Priest Holmes, and baseball player Louis Castillo, according to that site.

So how did this medical malpractice occur? In medical malpractice surgical cases, the most effective claim is that the surgery which went awry, was unnecessary-that the standard of care was violated when the surgeon decided to perform the operation. In so doing, the usual defense to a surgical claim of medical malpractice-that the bad result was an unfortunate, unavoidable complication, can not be used. Obviously, if the surgery was unnecessary, then the doctor should never have subjected the patient to the risk of these complications.

That is how this claim was presented. The plaintiff’s attorneys argued that Dr. Philippon performed an unnecessary surgery. They said Shreffler was among the first patients Philippon ever performed the procedure on, and he used the teen for practice. Certainly, this presents a persuasive and compelling argument and undermines the typical defense tactics.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Florida Hospital lawyers have urged the Florida Supreme Court to delay implementation of the state constitutional amendment that gives patients the "right to know'' about past mistakes made by doctors and medical facilities. These medical malpractice lawyers also asked the justices to reverse two separate appellate court rulings that struck down a law the Legislature passed to implement the amendment and limit the records of "adverse medical incidents'' that patients can obtain.

The amendment is one of two voters passed in 2004 after they had been placed on the ballot through citizen initiatives organized by trial lawyers who represent patients in medical malpractice cases. The other amendment bars doctors with three malpractice judgments against them from practicing.

The Florida Supreme Court is deciding these issues as a result of disagreement between appellate courts as to whether the amendment applies to past records or only those created since voters approved the measure in November 2004. The amendment itself does not specifically say if it's prospective or retroactive. If the amendment applies only to new records, those created after the 2004 election, that would result in a delay of many years before the measure gives patients any meaningful help in its intended purpose of letting them check on the past performance of doctors and hospitals.

Now that the Court has heard argument, we will await its decision. Hopefully, the true intent of the voters will prevail and healthcare consumers will soon be able to benefit from the availability of important information about their doctors and hospitals.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers, we continue to hear medical malpractice insurers claim that there is a “medical malpractice crisis.” Of course, there is no basis or evidence to support these claims. A recent report by a former insurance commissioner bears this out. Former Missouri Insurance Commisioner Jay Angoff has reported that the nation’s 15 leading medical malpractice insurers have unnecessarily driven up health care costs by falsely claiming that a medical malpractice crisis exists and “price gouging” physicians.

These statistics undermine the insurance industry’s claim that medical malpractice lawyers and ever-increasing medical malpractice claims payments have been causing a crisis. Mr. Angoff noted that insurers’ net paid claims actually fell 14.7%, before accounting for inflation, to nearly $1.15 billion in 2006 from more than $1.34 billion in 2000. In addition, the insurers’ incurred losses fell 48% to $1.35 billion in 2006 from $2.6 billion in 2003, according to the report. Nine insurers in the group reported drops of more than 50% of incurred losses, and two reported reductions of more than 80%. Moreover, between 2003 and year-end 2006, the insurers’ surplus grew 43%, the report stated.

Of course, despite this economic success, medical malpractice insurers did not cut-back on premiums to doctors. Rather, medical malpractice premiums continued to rise sharply from 2000 through 2006. Insurers reported $2.38 billion of net written premiums in 2006, a 24% increase from $1.92 billion of net written premiums in 2000.

According to Jon Haber, chief executive officer for the AAJ, “Medical malpractice insurance companies have been price-gouging doctors, padding their pockets with excessive premiums and driving up the cost of health care.” “Cynically, these same insurance companies have been blaming high premiums on a so-called ‘malpractice crisis’ that doesn’t exist. We have an insurance crisis, not a medical malpractice crisis.”

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers we are disappointed with the Florida Supreme Court's ruling, holding that hospitals cannot be held liable in medical malpractice cases for failing to ensure doctors with staff privileges meet state financial responsibility requirements. The unanimous ruling disapproved of decisions by three district courts of appeal on that issue. In doing so, the Court adopted the position of the Fourth District Court of Appeal.

Previously, courts had interpreted the financial responsibility law to hold hospitals accountable for staff doctors who failed to obtain the necessary medical malpractice insurance or otherwise satisfy his or her minimum financial obligations. However, Justice Barbara Pariente writing for the Court held that the state law requiring doctors to establish financial responsibility as a condition of staff privileges does not create a duty on the part of the hospitals to enforce that mandate.

Instead, it's up to physicians to comply or else face sanctions including possible license revocation, she wrote. Also, insurance companies must notify the state if a doctor's policy is canceled or not renewed.

This is truly a sad day for Florida medical malpractice victims. As a practical matter if hospitals have no responsibility to ensure staff doctors comply with financial responsibility laws to obtain or keep staff privileges, there is no one looking out for hospital patients. This decision overturns the well-reasoned opinion of the Fifth District Court of Appeal that found the obvious intent of the Legislature to permit injured parties to collect at least $250,000 from hospitals that fail to enforce the requirement.

The case of Stuart and Lena Horowitz against Plantation General Hospital for medical malpractice included a $859,200 against Dr. Derek V. Jhagroo, failed attempts to collect that judgment because he left the United States, had no property here and no medical malpractice insurance. Without the ability to at least hold the hospital liable for the $250,000 minimum required to obtain or hold staff privileges, the plaintiffs will likely recover nothing for their losses.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers, we find the recent medical malpractice trial of a woman who lost her fingers and feet after complications of tummy tuck surgery both encouraging and disappointing. Through their $30-million verdict, this medical malpractice jury held both the admitting hospital and doctors liable for the injury and loss. That is encouraging, but due to Florida’s "Good Samaritan" law the matter is not yet resolved. Indeed, it appears that one doctor who participated in this medical nightmare may well escape the jurors’ judgment. That is the disappointing aspect of this medical malpractice lawsuit.

In the continuing fight to avoid liability for medical malpractice, insurers, hospitals and doctors have been successful in passing legislation that protects emergency room doctors from malpractice awards as long as a jury finds they did not act recklessly. So, a victim can no longer hold an emergency doctor responsible for serious injury or death caused by carelessness and unreasonable conduct during an “emergency” visit.

In this case, while finding fault, jurors determined that one of the two doctors did not act with reckless disregard. Under the Good Samaritan law that may well permit that doctor to escape responsibility for his actions.

Another aspect of this case worth noting involves the time of the medical malpractice. As we have discussed in a previous post, medical malpractice appears to occur more on weekends. In this case, the plaintiff’s troubles culminated on Super Bowl Sunday 2001 when an ambulance carried her to Memorial Hospital in Tampa. She had undergone a tummy tuck 20 days earlier to repair abdominal muscle damage from three caesarean sections. Blood and fluid had collected in her wound. Her fingers were blue. Her surgeon was out of town and another doctor provided her care. Of course, this set the stage for the tragedy that eventually occurred.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

While we face great bias in favor of doctors and hospitals in our medical malpractice trials, a recent study may help to get the word out that overcrowded hospitals trying to streamline care and cut costs put their patients at risk every day. A study by two Boston hospitals finds preventable mistakes including medication errors, nerve injuries and infections.

The study, published in the May issue of the journal Medical Care, found that the top goals of hospitals, (1) to cut costs and (2) improve patient safety are inconsistent and work against each other. What is amazing to me is that it actually took a study by health care providers to determine that you can not focus on saving money without sacrificing patient care and safety. As this study points out when hospitals cut costs it usually decreases staffing. Specifically, the study found a 10 percent increase in the patient-to-nurse ratio at one of the four hospitals which led to a 28 percent increase in adverse events.

Researchers at Brigham and Women’s and Massachusetts General Hospital reviewed 6,841 individual patient records over 12 months from a number of hospitals and found 1,530 adverse events. Obviously this study demonstrates that hospitals are big business, with a focus on the bottom line rather than on patient care.

While this study alone will not counteract the bias that we will face when we select our next medical malpractice jury, this study and similar information may begin to help educate a future jurors. Certainly, throughout our trials, we focus our juries attention on the choices of the defendant health care providers which reflect haste, inattention and carelessness as a result of inadequate staffing or other cost-saving measures.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

In our medical malpractice cases, we always find prospective jurors with strong opinions against medical malpractice claims. Many folks simply believe that doctors should not be sued as long they tried their best. Unless these prospective jurors find that a doctor intended to do harm, they do not believe a doctor should be sued. A recent study on juror bias in medical malpractice cases reveals that most people not only favor doctors going into medical malpractice trials, but easily find for the doctor if there is any doubt about the plaintiff’s claim.

A study by Philip Peters Jr., J.D., a professor at the University of Missouri, Columbia School of Law, entitled "Doctors and Juries," presents an analysis of medical liability lawsuits from 1989 to 2006. Peters reports that juries can identify weak allegations against physicians and that 80 percent to 90 percent of the time, jurors come to the same decisions that independent legal experts would have made. In addition the study finds that juries accept the testimony of the doctor’s expert when there is any conflict in the evidence. If that occurs the jury seems to dismiss the testimony of the plaintiff's expert.

"From the perspective of malpractice defendants, at least, jury performance is remarkably good," wrote Peters in the study. Importantly for all plaintiff malpractice lawyers, the study finds that patients lose about half the cases they would have been expected to win. Again, this emphasizes the need for practitioners to simplify cases and embrace all of the facts. As the patient’s lawyer we must never run from difficult facts. This study demonstrates the need to deal with apparent inconsistencies in the proof and turn them to your advantage.

In one of our cases, for example, a patient failed to return for a follow-up visit. The doctor and his expert both claimed that if the patient simply returned all the necessary care would have been provided and the tragedy avoided. In essence, this was the classic “blame game.” Rather than ignore this "bad evidence" or run from the fact that our client missed an appointment, we emphasized the fact that the defendant was contacted after the scheduled visit and never asked to see the decedent. We questioned the defendant about how important the studies were that he claimed he would have performed. We asked “if these studies were so important, would you agree that it would have been even more urgent to do those studies 2 days after the scheduled visit when you were speaking with your patient?” Sadly in this case, the defendant failed to instruct his patient to come right in to do the necessary studies. This, in our view, really strikes at the heart of the defense, destroys the doctor’s credibility and eliminates any inconsistencies in the proof.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Recently, Orlando medical malpractice lawyers filed a lawsuit against Orlando Regional Medical Center to find out what happened to their client. Almost nine months ago, Claudia Meja went into Orlando Regional South Seminole to give birth to her son Mathew. She was kept in the hospital for complications and, twelve days later, was moved to Orlando Regional Medical Center. After being moved, she underwent a quadruple amputation. The hospital told her she had a flesh eating bacteria, streptococcus, and toxic shock. But she wanted to know more specifics about what had happened, including how, exactly, she had caught streptococcus.

When the hospital wouldn’t give her any more info, she sought legal counsel who directed a letter to under Florida’s “The Patients Right to Know About Adverse Medical Incidents Act.” That would seem an appropriate course of action. Certainly, one would assume that becoming a quadruple amputee sure sounds like an adverse medical incident to me. And the hospital’s response?

A letter saying that “Ms. Mejia’s request may require legal resolution.” In other words, “sue us if you want to know.” So her counsel has now filed suit against the hospital to find out why she lost her limbs. This case should be monitored to determine whether Amendment 7 has any teeth. From our experience, hospitals are raising work-product privilege objections in an effort to deny discovery of adverse incident reports. The applicability of this privilege may need to be addressed by the Florida Supreme Court. As we understand the issues briefed in the Buster case presently before the Court, work product privilege was not relied upon in the trial court and therefore will not likely be addressed.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers we often find surgical and anesthesia cases involving terrible neglect and significant damages. However, the doctors or surgeons involved possess inadequate insurance coverage. Is there any opportunity for you to provide your injured medical malpractice client with full compensation?

Every Florida medical malpractice lawyers should consider the applicability of the hospital's non-delegable duty to provide competent medical care to its patients. While hospitals have strenuously fought liability for the actions of its staff doctors, plaintiff medical malpractice lawyers have had some success. Recently, in an anesthesia malpractice case, Florida medical malpractice lawyers have received additional ammunition to hold hospitals responsible for negligent provision of medical care and services in their facility.

In Judith Wax v.Tenet Health System Hospitals, Inc. et.al.32 Fla. L. Weekly D641(March 16, 2007) the Fourth District addressed hospital liability for an anesthesiologist's negligence. In this wrongful death, medical malpractice case the court undertakes a great analysis of the doctrine of non-delegable duty. Looking to common law, contract law and Florida statutes, the court held that the hospital involved may well have assumed the non-delegable duty to provide anesthesia services. The court went on to rule that if the hospital did assume such a duty then such services must be performed in a competent manner. Refreshingly, the court announced that patients should expect to receive careful and non-negligent services in Florida hospitals.

This is a must read for every Florida medical malpractice lawyer. We have for too long been fighting an uphill battle to obtain justice for our clients. With arbitrary limitations now in place, being able to hold hospitals responsible for anesthesia, surgical and pathology services should at least be considered in every case. As you will see by reviewing this decision and the Fifth District's opinion in Pope v. Winter Park Healthcare Group, Ltd, 939 So. 2d 185(Fla. 5th DCA 2006) discussed at length by the Wax court, the hospital consent form may provide the contractual basis for hospital liability. Indeed, as the Wax court stated in a footnote holding hospitals to a non-delegable duty to provide adequate radiology departments, pathology laboratories and emergency rooms "makes sense as an aspiration for the evolution of Florida law."

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Having handled Florida medical malpractice cases, it is always difficult to have to explain to potential clients that the statute of limitations bars otherwise meritorious claims. This is even more tragic when the claim involves a minor child. Recently, the Ohio Supreme Court rendered a decision which gives parents more time to file medical malpractice lawsuits against doctors for injury to their children. The ruling extends the window in which parents can file lawsuits from one year up to the child's 19th birthday.

The unanimous decision was based on claims brought by the parents of 17-year-old Tara Fehrenbach of Loveland. Tara suffered permanent injuries as a result of bacterial meningitis that she contracted as an infant in 1990. The meningitis was not diagnosed timely and led to severe brain damage. Of course, as you would expect, Tara’s parents were all consumed with the medical needs of their daughter and they did not think about potential medical malpractice claims.

Tara's parents eventually filed a lawsuit on behalf of their daughter and themselves in 1997 against her pediatrician, and the pediatric group. They claimed negligence because the defendants failed to diagnose and treat the meningitis that led to Tara's health problems. However, due to Ohio’s very short statute of limitations, the Fehrenbachs' case was dismissed as being time-barred. Now this draconian result has been remedied.

While Florida and most states often talk about putting children’s interests first, it seems that in reality, too little is done. Here, the Ohio state supreme court has advanced the interest of child victims of medical malpractice and should be applauded.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers handling significant injury and wrongful death claims in this most challenging area of injury law, we sometimes think our colleagues on the defense side have it too easy. Few Orlando medical malpractice lawyers would tell you that it is easy to sue careless doctors or hospitals in light of the insurance industry propaganda, the media coverage of the so-called medical malpractice crisis and the arbitrary limits on non-economic damages. Yet, we should remember the burdens that medical malpractice lawyers defending these doctors and hospitals must bear.

The recent verdict for a patient who suffered a stroke that was misdiagnosed as sinusitis demonstrates what can happen to lawyers defending a medical malpractice case that goes south. In that case, a former pro basketball player in the Philippines, went to a Florida community hospital emergency room complaining of nausea, headache, dizziness and double vision. He was sent home five hours later with a painkiller prescription and a diagnosis of sinusitis. No one realized the patient was having a stroke. He returned to the hospital with more severe symptoms the next morning and underwent surgery hours later to relieve brain swelling. He ended up in a coma for three months and emerged from it permanently disabled.

The story did not end with the medical malpractice lawyers for the doctors enjoying their hourly fees and simply moving on to the next case. No, the doctors who were the target of that lawsuit have sued their lawyers. The doctors allege that their attorneys turned down settlement offers within their policy limits and which represented a fraction of the final judgment. The doctors also claim that their medical malpractice lawyers did not communicate adequately and failed to appropriately protect their interests.

I find persuasive the post on the Chicago Personal Injury Law Blog, entitled How Do You Defend The Indefensible? In addressing this case that post concluded that the doctors’ liability appeared clear but the medical malpractice insurance company involved “stuck to the industry standard of delay, deny, and defend.” In my personal experience with this medical malpractice insurer, Pro National, I have encountered similar tactics. In one medical malpractice case this insurer offered no settlement offer to my client; however, our Orlando jury returned a verdict of $30,000,000.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

As Orlando medical malpractice lawyers, we are not surprised by the recent study released in the New England Journal of Medicine finding a higher death rate for people who go to the hospital for heart attacks on the weekends. Due to inadequate staffing fewer invasive cardiac procedures are performed on patients having a heart attack on the weekend. The authors suggest that the lack of proper testing caused by the difference in staffing levels appears to be responsible for the increased death rate.

The study tracked over 200,000 patients and found about a 1% difference in death rates of those cardiac patients entering the hospital on the weekend as opposed to a weekday. Certainly, in many medical malpractice cases we have handled over the past twenty years we have found staffing deficiencies as contributing factors. Who can deny that when hospital staffing levels drop, patient care will suffer?

Outcomes for patients with heart attacks improve by early angiography and efforts to open the arteries causing the heart attack. No doctor I have ever deposed has denied that cardiac patients should be treated quickly and aggressively. Unfortunately, the study found that on weekends, hospital staffers perform fewer invasive cardiac procedures because the necessary personnel are not working.

Current guidelines for patients suffering severe heart attacks call for getting them into the cardiac catheterization lab within 90 minutes so their blocked arteries can be reopened. But for those with less severe cases, the procedure may be put off for 48 to 72 hours. Usually, in our cardiac cases involving emergency care, the defense focuses on whether the patient’s presentation warranted faster intervention than what our client received. It seems this current study can be interpreted to suggest that all heart attack patients should receive faster treatment.

While this study may not prevent needless injury and wrongful death to innocent heart attack patients, it certainly sounds an important warning to consumers. The fact that this warning comes from a prestigious medical journal will hopefully have a greater impact on those seeking medical care on the weekend and their family members

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

When damage limits in medical malpractice cases went into effect, Floridians lost the right to fair compensation for debilitating injury and death due to medical negligence. The insurance industry and their allies in the Florida Medical Association told the people of Florida that unless they got these restrictions, doctors would be forced to flee the state, stop practicing or not carry insurance at all.

In return, Florida doctors were supposed to see lower rates and more malpractice insurance availability. As the Florida Justice Association has reported, one of those goals has been accomplished. Since 2004, more than 18 new companies have started writing new business in Florida. They are entering Florida for one reason -- business is booming. You need only scan an insurance industry trade publication to see that "times are good" in Florida's medical malpractice market. Flushed with cash and facing fewer claims, many insurance companies have announced dividends and aggressive stock repurchasing plans.

While insurers and their investors are reaping excessive profits and flouting the intent of the Legislature, Florida doctors have seen little or no savings. When the FMA declared a crisis in 2003 and asked lawmakers to slash patient rights for the promise of decreased premiums, their intention was not to enrich the insurance industry. But four years later, only token rate decreases have been submitted, following years of double digit increases.

This year, doctors should receive the relief promised. Certainly if the people must give up their rights to fair compensation, the doctors should be the ones to benefit. The Florida Justice Association is correct that the focus should be on the interest of doctors to pay reasonable premiums for medical malpractice insurance and on restoring patients' rights to receive full compensation for damages.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

Florida Medical malpractice lawyers seek to protect the rights of victims of medical malpractice to hold careless doctors and hospitals accountable for devastating injuries. Unfortunately, over the past years victims’ rights have been sacrificed. While it was not the intention of voters or perhaps well-meaning legislators, the outcome has been simply more profits for the insurance industry. Liability insurers continue to get richer at the expense of innocent medical malpractice and personal injury victims.

Now, FPIC Insurance Group, Inc. has improved its earnings in 2006 by 47 percent compared to a year earlier. Indeed, both insurance company profit and medical malpractice rises while fewer and fewer victims can successfully hold reckless health care providers accountable. In every way FPIC has benefited from the legal and economic climate. The company earned $51.2 million, or $5.02 per share, compared to $35 million in 2005, or $3.43 per share.

FPIC Insurance Group Inc. (NASDAQ: FPIC), based in Jacksonville, provides medical professional liability insurance for doctors, dentists and other health care providers. Over the years, along with other medical malpractice insurers, they have lobbied our state legislators to institute unfair tort reform. Obviously it is difficult for most busy people to understand that insurers already have an advantage in medical malpractice cases. Future victims of medical malpractice do not know who they will be and therefore may not consider the important rights that these insurers have been attempting to strip away. Yet, we are seeing more and more people begin to understand that our civil justice system is tilted in favor of insurers and those who they defend.

Despite increasing difficulties we will continue to proudly represent innocent injury victims and their families. There has never been a more important time for fellow colleagues to join together to fight back against attempts to deprive our citizens of protection from careless doctors and hospitals.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark:

In a major defeat for Florida medical malpractice lawyers and those they represent, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that cruise lines cannot be held liable for medical malpractice by shipboard doctors. In Carnival Corp. vs. Darce Carlisle, the court stated that when deciding questions of U.S. maritime law, Florida courts must follow uniform precedents established at the federal level. Finding that federal courts have generally held that cruise line operators do not exercise control over the doctors’ medical practices, the Court held that there was no cruise line liability for any medical malpractice.

This case arose from a medical malpractice lawsuit filed in April 1998 by the parents of teenager Elizabeth Carlisle, who was diagnosed with flu while aboard the Carnival Corp. liner Ecstasy in 1997. When the family returned home, Elizabeth was found to have suffered a ruptured appendix. As a consequence, she was left sterile.

Elizabeth's parents sued Miami-based Carnival and Dr. Mauro Neri for medical malpractice in Miami-Dade Circuit Court, claiming the doctor was an agent of the cruise line. But the trial court granted summary judgment for Carnival. However, the case was reinstated by the Third District Court of Appeal, which found that a shipboard doctor is under the cruise line’s direct supervision and is not an independent contractor.

The Supreme Court determined that the District Court ignored a longstanding principle of uniformity in federal maritime law when it reinstated the Carlisle family’s suit against Carnival. The United States Supreme Court will be asked to review this decision and overturn existing federal precedent.

As a practical matter, I believe that without being able to hold the cruise lines responsible for medical malpractice by ship doctors, there is little chance of recovery for victims of medical malpractice. We all know that ship doctors hail from many foreign countries and would be difficult to locate and serve with a lawsuit. Of course, there would also be the challenge of collecting from a ship doctor with no medical malpractice insurance or assets that can be reached to satisfy a Florida judgment. Inasmuch as Florida cruise lines attract citizens from all over the United States, the impact of this decision is far-reaching.

Posted by Tony Caggiano | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Medical Malpractice

Bookmark: