Recently in Medical Malpractice Category

October 9, 2012

Deadly Meningitis Outbreak Linked to Massachusetts Continues to Spread

This is an unfortunate story that seems unable to run out of steam. A nationwide outbreak of meningitis is being linked to a specialty pharmacy company here in Massachusetts. Every day the Center for Disease Control has increased the number of victims who have caught a deadly strain of meningitis after receiving a tainted steroid shot intended to relieve back pain. The current number stands at 119 cases of meningitis with 11 documented deaths related to the tainted steroid injections. The cases of reported illnesses has spread to ten States.

The company voluntarily recalled the steroid that was sent to clinics in 23 States after a tainted vial was found on their own premises. They have since expanded the recall to include everything they have distributed.

While there are no confirmed cases of meningitis here in Rhode Island, the Department of Health continues to notify potential victims of the possible exposure. An additional 50 patients have been notified of the link today. Victims who have contracted meningitis from the tainted injections will have a strong product liability case against the manufacturer who clearly released an unsafe and defective product into the market.

Meningitis is an inflammation of the protective membranes covering the brain and spinal cord. It is an extremely serious and potentially fatal disease because of the bacteria's proximity to the brain and spinal column. The most common symptoms of meningitis include headaches, neck stiffness, photophobia (aversion to bright light), fever and confusion. Antibiotics and antiviral drugs are used to treat meningitis once discovered by lumbar puncture.

UPDATE - October 30, 2012

Yesterday, the first confirmed case of meningitis has extended into Rhode Island. The total number of people sickened by the tainted injections is now over 300 with 25 associated deaths. This is a sad story that continues to develop each day.

If you or anyone that you know contracted meningitis after receiving the tainted steroid injections, should contact our office right away. Our experience in product liability and medical malpractice cases will help ensure that you obtain everything to which you are entitled.

August 1, 2012

A Major Victory for Injury Victims Scored in Missouri Should Have Widespread Implications

Missouri was one of many States that impose caps on noneconomic damages (i.e. pain and suffering) in personal injury cases, specifically medical malpractice. In Missouri, an injured person could receive no more than $350,000 above his or her economic losses (medical expenses and lost wages). While that may seem like a great deal of money, it is very little to someone catastrophically injured by another's negligence. For a simple example, consider a medical malpractice case where the doctor amputates the wrong leg (think it can't happen - look here). That person will spend the rest of his or her life in a wheelchair and would legally be unable to recover more than $350,000 in damages!

Yesterday, the Missouri Supreme Court in Watts v. Cox Medical Center, ruled that the cap on damages was an unconstitutional infringement of ones right to a trial by jury. The Federal Constitution (mirrored by the States) guarantees the right of anyone with cause to have a trial decided by a jury of his peers. It should always be the jury who decides the outcome of a case including the damages, and not lawmakers influenced by insurance companies.

It has long been an argument of the plaintiff's bar and American Association for Justice that caps on tort awards were unconstitutional, and this Supreme Court decision affirms our position. Hopefully, this decision will influence other States to make the same decision which they should agree is constitutionally mandated. This decision should also strike a blow for the tort reform movement (although this election campaign has not brought up the topic of tort reform nearly as much as four years ago). Numerous studies, including those conducted by independent groups with no stake in the tort reform debate, have shown that medical caps and restrictions on personal injury claims do not reduce health care costs and lead to lower quality patient care.

I want to personally applaud the attorneys behind this decision for their tireless work and to the Missouri Supreme Court for amending a wrong.

November 2, 2011

As Many as 2000 Patients May Have Received the Wrong Medication at Rhode Island Hospitals

Lifespan, which manages several RI hospitals including: Rhode Island Hospital, Miriam Hospital, Newport Hospital and Hasbro Children's Hospital, has today announced that as many as 2,000 patients over the past year may have received an erroneous prescription at one of these Lifespan Hospitals. Lifespan is blaming this medical malpractice error on a computer, or software, malfunction. Their statement does not indicate whether anyone was harmed by this malpractice. It is understood that most affected patients have been contacted regarding this error or are in the process of being contacted.

Giving a patient the wrong medication, the wrong dose of a medication or unnecessary medications are all examples of medical malpractice. While the full extent of these errors by Lifespan are unknown, you may be entitled to collect personal injury damages if you were injured or harmed because of receiving incorrect medication. At the same time, not all victims of this mistake are entitled to compensation. If you discovered the error before ingesting the medication or if you ingested the medication but were not harmed, you may not be entitled to compensation. However, if the wrong medication caused you personal injury, even temporarily, you may be entitled to damages for pain and suffering, medical bills (if you were required to seek treatment) and lost wages if you were unable to work.

It is unclear if anyone was seriously injured by Lifespan's mistake but given the high risk of pharmaceutical medication, it is likely that someone was seriously injured. Patients may have been given medications to which they are allergic or may have been given medications that have harmful or potentially fatal interactions with other medications. Overdoses from receipt of the wrong amount of medication are also possible. Anyone seriously injured because they were prescribed the wrong medication should contact an experienced medical malpractice attorney right away.

October 26, 2011

Even Right Wing Think Tanks Agree that Caps on Medical Malpractice Awards are Bad!

It's been a while since I last posted but I was pre-occupied with a trial and I return to my office to find welcome news in the mail. Today I found a recent report from the Cato Institute, a right wing conservative think tank, that has confirmed what this blog has long held, namely, that caps on medical malpractice (or other tort claim) awards is a mistake! It is unusual to hear this coming from a right wing think tank since it is generally the province of Republicans and right-wingers to fight for tort reform. Nevertheless, their report has indicated that "caps unfairly shift the costs of malpractice injuries from negligent providers to their victims." The study further states that "reducing physician liability for negligent care by capping court awards, all else equal, will reduce the resources allocated to medical professional liability underwriting and oversight and make many patients worse off".

This last sentence is critical. The accountability that medical malpractice and personal injury lawsuits provide is the one last defense that many consumers have from being unfairly harmed through the negligence of others. Capping damages not only invites increased negligence it denies adequate resources to those severely injured through the negligence of others.

Consider that the FDA has a long record of failing to keep unsafe food out of the distribution change and unsafe drugs from the pharmacy counters. They simply lack the resources and the personnel to ensure the safety of all of the consumer products under their protective umbrella. If tort reform were to interfere with the ability to bring lawsuits against negligent companies, then we are not far from welcoming products such as chinese dry wall, toxic food, and dangerous drugs into the market without proper oversight.

The study found that while "supporters of capping court awards for medical malpractice argue that caps will make health care more affordable" that the actual case "may not be that simple. First, caps on awards may result in some patients not receiving adequate compensation for injuries they suffer as a result of physician negligence. Second, because caps limit physician liability, they can also mute incentives for physicians to reduce the risk of negligent injuries . . . ."

It doesn't work. It hasn't worked. It won't work in the future!

March 3, 2011

Deval Patrick to Suggest Medical Malpractice Reform in Massachusetts

Despite ample evidence (here, here and here) that medical malpractice lawsuits are not the cause for soaring health care costs and poor patient care, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick is proposing a bill intended to reduce medical malpractice lawsuits. The Governor, taking a page from steps taken in other States, is proposing a bill to amend medical malpractice law in Massachusetts. Under the proposal:

...doctors in Massachusetts would be able to apologize to patients -- without the risk that their apology could be used against them later, in court. The state would also implement a six-month "cooling off period," so that hospitals and patients could try to resolve problems without lawsuits.

President Obama, as part of his healthcare reform and recently discussed at the State of the Union Address, is also suggesting potential reforms. One such suggestion is the creation of a Health Court which will remove the jury from the process (despite the Constitution guaranteeing the right to a trial by jury) in favor of a single Judge. The intent is to streamline medical malpractice awards because juries often have a wide range in the amount of money that they award.

It has been said on numerous occasions... malpractice reform will only result in lesser quality care for patients, reduced ability to exercise Constitutional rights in open Court and WILL NOT reduce health insurance costs. A number of independents studies continue to show that eliminating medical malpractice lawsuits all together would save approximately 1% of the total cost of healthcare. One Percent!!

November 17, 2010

Objects Left Inside Two Patients at Women & Infants in Providence

The Rhode Island Health Department has disclosed today that two serious medical errors occurred last summer at Women & infant's Hospital in Providence. In both instances, medical and surgical equipment was left inside the patient after the procedure was completed. People often wonder how does such obvious medical malpractice occur? Yet time after time we hear about surgical material left inside patients, wrong site surgeries, and more. This story also shows that obvious medical malpractice can even occur at hospitals with very good reputations and records.

The first incident occurred on July 24 when surgical gauze was left inside a patient following childbirth. The second incident occurred in August when a piece of thread from surgical gauze seperated and was left in the patient's abdomen. From the Department of Health website:

HEALTH conducted an investigation and determined that during the July incident, the obstetrical team did not follow the hospital's policy about communication of patient information when the staff changed shifts resulting in the gauze roll being left in the patient's vagina. During the August incident, HEALTH determined that the hospital's surgical count policy was not followed. At the conclusion of the procedure, a surgical staff member noticed that the marker thread had separated from a gauze pad used during surgery. A piece of x-ray sensitive thread was found and removed before the patient left the operating room, but an x-ray was not done to confirm that the entire piece of thread was removed.

Doctors are well educated people with good intentions, but mistakes can and do occur, even extremely obvious ones. If a doctor failed to treat a patient within the recognized standard of care, it may be grounds for a medical malpractice lawsuit.

Continue reading "Objects Left Inside Two Patients at Women & Infants in Providence" »

September 12, 2010

Doctor Involved in the Death of a Patient Following Abortion Set for Trial

Three years ago, a 22 year old Cape Cod woman, Laura Hope Smith, died following an abortion procedure. The estate of Ms. Smith is represented by a Boston medical malpractice attorney and there will surely be a civil lawsuit for her wrongful death. What makes this case interesting is that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is charging the obstetrician, Dr. Rapin Osathanondh, with manslaughter.

Medical malpractice, generally, is a civil action between the injured party and the doctor who failed to treat the patient with the necessary care. If the plaintiff can prove that the doctor was negligent, he or she may collect personal injury damages. In this case, the care offered to Ms. Smith was so far below the necessary standard of care that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts believe it was criminal behavior and have charged the doctor with felony manslaughter. The prosecutors allege that Dr. Osathanondh's negligence was "willful, wanton, and reckless."

The board (of medicine) said Osathanondh did not have any means of monitoring Smith's heart, and did not have oxygen or a functioning blood pressure cuff in the room during Smith's abortion. The board also alleged that he "failed to adhere to basic cardiac life support protocol" and did not call 911 in a timely manner.

Osathanondh was also accused of deceiving staff members by claiming he gave Smith oxygen during the procedure and by saying that Smith was monitored by a pulse oximeter during her procedure. Neither step was taken, the board said.

Dr. Osathanondh, or his insurance company, will most likely pay the Estate of Ms. Smith for her unfortunate loss. It is quite uncommon for doctors to be charged with criminal cases in addition to the civil lawsuit by the family, so this will be very interesting to follow. To add another twist to this case, the defense must be careful to select jurors who will listen to the facts of the case and not find Dr. Osathanondh guilty of manslaughter because he performs abortions.

Continue reading "Doctor Involved in the Death of a Patient Following Abortion Set for Trial" »

July 16, 2010

Attorney Joseph Lamy Interviewed Regarding OB-GYN Use of Non FDA Approved IUD Devices

Several hundred RI women were implanted with non FDA approved IUD devices (a form of birth control) at some of the biggest OB-GYN practices in the State. It is a story that I have written about in the past and which seems to continue to grow. An up to date list of doctors who used non FDA approved IUD devices is available from the Rhode Island Department of Health.

Today I had the pleasure and good fortune to be interviewed by Rhode Island Lawyers Weekly as they prepare an article on this very subject. We discussed whether the actions of these doctors amounts to medical malpractice and what options the victims may have in seeking compensation. Any medical malpractice case requires both medical negligence and damages. While the facts surrounding this story suggest medical negligence, the extent of the injuries sustained has yet to be determined. I believe that this is a medical battery and a procedure performed outside of the scope of the implied consent. Therefore, there is some value in the case, but it may not be a lot of money.

What these doctors need to fear is a patient coming forward who became pregnant while on the non approved IUD device. In that medical malpractice claim for unwanted pregnancy, the doctor or facility is potentially liable for the entire cost of raising that child to the age of majority which as we all know is hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As I continue to tell the female victims who call my office: 1) contact the RI Department of Health; 2) contact a primary care physician or other trustworthy OB-GYN; 3) seek alternate forms of birth control and do not rely on the IUD device because it may fail.

Continue reading "Attorney Joseph Lamy Interviewed Regarding OB-GYN Use of Non FDA Approved IUD Devices" »

July 13, 2010

Study Shows Doctors are Unlikely to Blow the Whistle on Incompetent Doctors

The Study which appears in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that many doctors will not report their colleagues who are clearly unfit to practice medicine. Doctors are able to report to work drunk or while addicted to drugs with little fear of retribution. Even outright incompetence is rarely reported by other doctors.

In the study, 17% of the doctors surveyed had DIRECT knowledge of an incompetent or drug addicted physician in their workplace. Of those doctors, one third failed to report their knowledge to superiors. Among the reasons given for failing to act: belief that someone else will take care of it; that nothing will be done; retribution for being a whistle blower. One fifth of all doctors having direct knowledge of drug or alcohol abuse is a very large number. The number of physicians who may suspect that their colleague is on drugs or incompetent will be much higher.

The American Medical Association holds that it is an ethical requirement for any doctor with direct knowledge of mental impairment or incompetence of another doctor to report such knowledge. Unfortunately, too many incompetent doctors continue to work every day.

Despite extensive training and preparation, doctors do make mistakes every day leading to medical malpractice.

Continue reading "Study Shows Doctors are Unlikely to Blow the Whistle on Incompetent Doctors" »

June 30, 2010

Update on The IUD Investigation in Rhode Island

After my recent post indicating that OB-GYN Associates is being investigated by the Rhode Island Department of Health, it now turns out that two more popular practices, Bayside OB-GYN and the Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology, are now also under investigation. All three facilities are being investigated for using non FDA-approved IUD devices that were purchased from foreign countries, presumably for less money.

The IUD device is a form of birth control that is placed inside the uterus to prevent pregnancy. Non FDA approved devices may be ineffective in preventing pregnancy. All three facilities are now required to inform the patients that received the non FDA approved IUD.

This is a fascinating story and it is unclear how far this investigation might stretch. If you, a friend, or family member is or previously was a patient of these practices and became pregnant while under the IUD device, you may have a case for medical malpractice.

Continue reading "Update on The IUD Investigation in Rhode Island" »

June 26, 2010

Rhode Island Department of Health is Investigating OB-GYN Associates

The Rhode Island Department of Health has released a statement reporting that they are now investigating OB-GYN Associates for using non-FDA approved IUDs. OB-GYN Associates is a very popular practice group in Providence and this news must come as a shock to its thousands of patients.

IUDs are a form of birth control which is physically inserted into the uterus to prevent pregnancy. The Department of Health believes that OB-GYN Associates may have been purchasing non-FDA approved versions of Mirena and Paragard, popular versions of IUDs. Use of non FDA approved medicines, including IUDs is prohibited by law.

It is possible that over 500 women may have had the non FDA approved device inserted in the past year at OB-GYN Associates. The primary concern in using a non approved version of the medicine is that it will be ineffective. In this case, the IUD may be ineffective in preventing pregnancy and may result in unwanted pregnancy. Unwanted pregnancy caused by the negligence of a doctor is medical malpractice and if you believe that your unexpected birth may have been caused by doctor negligence then you need to contact our office right away.

If these accusations are true, it remains unclear what motive OB-GYN may have had to purchase non approved drugs from a non approved facility. The most likely explanation is decreased cost. It is also unclear if OB-GYN associates will be investigated for the use of any other non FDA approved drugs in their practice. If you feel that you may have been effected by this illegal practice, contact the Rhode Island Department of Health right away.

Continue reading "Rhode Island Department of Health is Investigating OB-GYN Associates" »

May 20, 2010

Dental Malpractice in Rhode Island and Massachusetts

If you have been injured by a dentist, you should be aware that dental malpractice is medical malpractice and will be treated in a very similar way. Much like doctors, we place our trust and oral health in the hands of dentists and they must exercise due care in treatment of patients. But problems may, and often do, occur. Some common examples of dental malpractice for which you might have a case include:

  • Unnecessary extraction of teeth
  • Extraction of the wrong tooth
  • wrongful death from a dental procedure
  • Nerve damage effecting the ability to taste or causing permanent numbness
  • Failure to detect periodontal disease or oral cancer
  • Dental product liability claim
  • Anesthesia injury or death
  • Treatment exceeding the scope of consent

As with medical malpractice, dental malpractice cases are difficult to prove and will most likely require litigation. However, if the injuries are severe and it appears that there may be liability it is absolutely worth speaking with an experienced personal injury attorney to discuss the merits of your case. If you have experienced any of the above injuries or other dental injury that caused serious injury or impairment in Rhode Island or Massachusetts, contact our office right away.

Continue reading "Dental Malpractice in Rhode Island and Massachusetts" »

April 25, 2010

Examining the Link Between Cerebral Palsy and Medical Malpractice

Cerebral Palsy is a permanent disorder affecting motor skills and coordination. It is caused by damage to the motor control center of the brain (cerebrum) and can occur in utero, at birth, or up to three years after birth. Newborn children may not immediately display signs and symptoms of Cerebral Palsy but you should immediately contact a doctor if you notice any of the following:

  • poor coordination
  • stiff muscles
  • unusual posture
  • involuntary movements
  • difficult or delayed crawling and walking
Cerebral Palsy and Child Birth Medical Malpractice


There are many forms of Cerebral Palsy and the condition can occur for any number of reasons, some of which are unavoidable. A percentage of Cerebral Palsy cases, however, occur due to medical error during childbirth.

Infection, head injury and lack of oxygen are three of the ways in which Cerebral Palsy can occur during childbirth. A few of the mistakes that doctors might make during delivery leading to Cerebral Palsy are:

  • Failure to detect and treat a prolapsed umbilical cord
  • Improper use of forceps and/or vacuum
  • Leaving the child in the birth canal too long despite lack of oxygen
  • Inadequately responding to fetal distress or changes in the fetal heart rate
  • Failing to perform a C-section despite fetal distress
  • Failure to identify and treat seizures after delivery

All medical malpractice cases are a challenge and the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that a child's Cerebral Palsy was caused by doctor error and not another cause. If your child has recently been diagnosed with Cerebral Palsy, especially if the child had a difficult birth experience, it is in your best interest to contact an attorney right away.

Damages for medical malpractice

Victims of Cerebral Palsy are unable to operate in society and in the workforce at the same level as others. They may also suffer a reduced IQ. Therefore, Cerebral Palsy is truly a life changing condition. While it may be impossible to place a value on such a condition, one report conducted in 2003 suggested that those suffering from Cerebral Palsy lost $921,000 due to medical expenses and inability to work.

This amount, which already seems slightly low, does not include damages for pain and suffering which could be in the millions.

Unfortunately, there is no known cure for this terrible condition.

Continue reading "Examining the Link Between Cerebral Palsy and Medical Malpractice" »

February 9, 2010

Illinois Supreme Court Uncaps Medical Malpractice Awards... Again

The battle over tort reform is being fought on every front, namely, media and public opinion, federal and state legislatures, and the judicial system. In Illinois, at least, the Supreme Court has stood up for its citizens civil rights and rejected a state law capping damages in medical malpractice lawsuits, finding that such a statute violates the separation of powers between the judicial and legislative branches. More specifically, it was determined that legislative caps on pain and suffering interferes with the Courts rights and discretion to reduce jury verdicts.

The Illinois law in question sought to cap damages against Hospitals at $1 million dollars and $500,000 against doctors and other health professionals. The case, Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, is one of many similar cases being fought across the Country right now.

Medical malpractice caps do not work, result in substandard medical care, and is not the magic fix-all for the healthcare crisis that certain interest groups deem it to be. Furthermore, several studies show that doctors actually pay less in malpractice premiums, when adjusted for inflation, than they did decades ago. The latter study stemming from our own Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

I have indicated in previous posts, here, and here, that tort reform is not the answer to this Country's health care problems. For one, the Congressional Budget Office has declared that malpractice costs are minimal in the large scheme of things. Second, medical malpractice attorneys, despite large potential reward, will only accept a very small percentage of cases. This is because it costs tens of thousands of dollars to bring a medical malpractice lawsuit, and many medical malpractice cases are unsuccessful. Therefore, if only the most obvious of medical errors are being challenged in the court systems, a great many errors go unpunished. This seems to combat the impression that doctors face countless "frivolous" lawsuits at the hands of greedy plaintiff attorneys.

Let's hear it for the Illinois Supreme Court. They have recognized that the judicial system is the best vehicle for protecting innocent doctors while awarding victims truly harmed by medical error. Let's hope that all States will follow their lead.

January 19, 2010

Massachusetts Statute of Limitations for Injuries to Children

As a result of a new case, I had to conduct some research on the tolling (or lack thereof) of the statute of limitations in Massachusetts as it pertains to medical malpractice and children. Rhode Island General Law 9-1-14.1 allows for a tolling of the statute of limitations until the victim turns 18. The plaintiff then has three years from that date in which to file suit.

Massachusetts' law is not as kind as Rhode Island's law. Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 231, Section 60D states:

Notwithstanding the provisions of section seven of chapter two hundred and sixty, any claim by a minor against a health care provider stemming from professional services or health care rendered, whether in contract or tort, based on an alleged act, omission or neglect shall be commenced within three years from the date the cause of action accrues, except that a minor under the full age of six years shall have until his ninth birthday in which the action may be commenced, but in no event shall any such action be commenced more than seven years after occurrence of the act or omission which is the alleged cause of the injury upon which such action is based except where the action is based upon the leaving of a foreign object in the body.

In summary, the statute of limitations does not toll for minors in Massachusetts unless the child victim was under the age of 6 at the time of the negligence. In which case the child has until his ninth birthday in which to bring a lawsuit. In no situation, however, can a lawsuit be brought more than seven years after the occurrence of the negligent act.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Statute of Limitations for Injuries to Children" »