Personal Injury Case Study
"SHE WAS REAR-ENDED BY A U-BOAT"
The local food store, while not often noted for extraordinary dangers proved to be treacherous for one of our female clients. While waiting to check out, our client with her back turned, was struck by a delivery cart (a large metal flat bed called a u-boat). As a result of the impact she was thrown by the overloaded cart to the floor and sustained injuries to her hip and shoulder requiring extended hospitalization and rehabilitation. The gentleman propelling the cart was unable to see her as a result of the overloaded condition of the cart. Her fractures are healing and the matter is moving toward a conclusion on the Supreme Court.
"THE REBOUND EFFECT OF LEAD"
Our infant client was exposed to lead based paint, in an illegal apartment in New York City over a six-month period. The infant, unbeknownst to her parents consumed lead chips that were flaking from the walls. When finally tested her lead levels were extraordinary. She had been an average student. After consuming so much lead, her cognitive abilities were substantially impaired. After extensive discovery and failed mediations, the matter was settled in a face to face conference for an amount of money that will provide an education, a house, and a fair standard of living for the rest of her life. The unexpected up side to this matter was that, as the defendants had argued she ultimately rebounded from the neurological effects of the lead and is now an "A" student.
Medical Malpractice Case Study
For two weeks before Memorial Day, 2002 our client, a wife and mother of two young girls, had complaints of right sided abdominal pain and consulted her internist who believed that her symptoms were from gall stones. Client was sent for a gall bladder ultrasound which showed gall stones. However, the ultrasound also showed a one inch solid mass in the liver. At the urging of the initial radiologist a CT scan was done the same day. The radiologist was still troubled by the appearance of the mass and indicated that he could not rule out a cancer. He suggested an MRI which was obtained a week later. A second radiologist read the MRI as a benign mass and did not suggest any further evaluation. The internist, believing this was a case of gall stones permitted our client to go on an extended summer family vacation with the advice to avoid fatty foods and consider consultation with a surgeon at some point. Unfortunately, the internist departed from the generally accepted axiom that any solid liver mass is cancer until proven otherwise by a biopsy.
In October 2002 our client had persistent abdominal pain and consulted with a surgeon who reviewed the studies and felt client should have her gall bladder removed and a biopsy of the mass performed. The client was sent for preoperative lab work which showed a severe anemia. The client returned to her internist who found blood in her stool and sent client for a colonoscopy. The colonoscopy showed a large cancer of the left colon and a biopsy of the liver mass proved to be a metastatic tumor from the colon. The client was operated on and received chemotherapy but despite excellent medical and surgical care she developed metastatic disease to her lungs and brain and passed away a year after diagnosis.
The malpractice carrier of the internist and second radiologist vigorously and aggressively defended this case arguing that she was too far advanced to have been saved at the time of initial presentation for the abdominal pain in 2002. The defense attacked our cancer surgeon's expert opinion arguing that it was not based on any scientific facts and attempted to exclude his testimony. All the while arguing that their doctors had no responsibility for our client's death.
However, this case was further complicated from a medical point by the fact that the internist failed to perform a rectal exam at a routine checkup even though she had done one the year prior. Internist also failed to follow up on a seemingly trivial lab abnormality from 2001. The follow-up on this abnormal lab test was another simple blood test but if this test had been done it may have revealed the presence of a bleeding colon tumor.
This oversight was pointed out to the malpractice carrier and settlement negotiations soon began. After weeks of negotiations, the case settled.
 | (516) 285-8867 | (718) 949-8505 | |
The Valley Stream, New York law firm of Riconda & Garnett, LLP serves clients across Long Island in the five boroughs of New York City in communities such as Valley Stream, North Valley Stream, Malverne, Elmont, Floral Park, New Hyde Park, Franklin Square, Hempstead, Cedarhurst, Woodmere, Hewlett, Lynbrook, Rockville Centre, East Rockaway, Oceanside, Merrick, Wantagh, Massapequa, Queens and Brooklyn.Nassau County | Suffolk County | Queens County | Kings County | New York County | ||