Plaintiff D’Knawn Hairston was awarded $7.6 million by a Sacramento Superior Court jury this week in California. The incident occurred in December of 2003 when Hairston was taken to the UC Davis Medical Center after complaining of numbness in her legs. An MRI was conducted but the doctors found her results to be normal. Medical malpractice attorneys say that over four years later, in February 2008, Hairston suffered from nearly the same symptoms but this time she was taken to Methodist Hospital.
A Shocking Discovery…Years Too Late
At the second hospital, doctors found an arteriovenous malformation on her thoracic spine. Professionals found that even after surgery, Hairston’s spine was still permanently damaged and she had no movement below her chest. These complications led to the young woman, who was fourteen years old when she first complained of these symptoms, becoming paraplegic. Hairston’s lawyers stated “the jury did a great job of working through the evidence and coming up with a result that will enable this very deserving young woman to move forward independently.” It is unclear what the life of Ms. Hairston would be like had the malformation been noticed when she originally visited healthcare providers as a young teenager. It is the hope of medical malpractice attorneys that the sum of money she is set to receive in damages will be adequate to assist her in living a successful and happy life. A statement released on behalf of the University of California stated “this is a regrettable and unfortunate case for everyone involved.”
Medical Malpractice Attorneys in New Jersey and Philadelphia
If you or a family member have recently been the victim of medical negligence, it is possible that you would like to speak with our professionals. Please contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation, or call for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.
The main goal is to determine whether the law is truly holding only negligent doctors liable while finding that on occasion, bad results do occur in the medical profession even when good doctors are providing treatment. Lawyers believe that the possibility of legal resolutions and potential lawsuits should result in doctors using safer procedures, better diagnostic tests, and more extensive fact finding before providing treatment. The law should also urge doctors to follow the “customary practice” standard which would discourage doctors from using untried and dangerous treatments as opposed to what is generally acceptable in the field. Finally, it is the hope of patients and medical malpractice attorneys alike that the possibility of a lengthy litigation process will push doctors to adapt and change with the profession rather than sticking with their old ways when new approaches are readily available.
Expert testimony is not necessary to prove a plaintiff’s case when the negligent conduct of the doctor was a matter of common knowledge. One example that constitutes a “matter of common knowledge” is all too frequent in medical treatment today. This example involves a surgeon who negligently leaves a foreign object inside of a patient, such as a sponge, following a medical procedure. Expert testimony is not necessary to prove that the doctor breached his duty to the patient when he began the procedure. A layperson 
This category of the law has spread in recent years and in different jurisdictions across the United States, other individuals have been able to claim loss of consortium. Some of these individuals include parents, grandparents, and children. It is crucial for lawyers to know the common law in the jurisdiction in which they practice because 
Lawyers believe that hedonic damages should be recognized in all states because the victims of some incidents of medical malpractice will no longer be able to engage in these behaviors. Imagine the case of an avid swimmer who, because of medical malpractice, could no longer kick her feet. Another example would be the golfer who, because of medical negligence, experienced stiffness in his arms and could no longer swing his clubs.
One major benefit of medical malpractice lawsuits is that they force healthcare providers to maintain acceptable standards of care. Doctors and nurses will be less likely to implement unsafe practices if they face a potential of being hauled into court and forced to pay for the results of their negligence. With certain reform systems suggesting a cap for damages, the maximum amount that lawsuits would be worth 
Several hospitals in the Netherlands use a checklist called SURPASS to assure that all the proper steps have been taken before a patient goes under the knife. Steps on the list include the confirmation of vital aspects of surgery such as the operating schedule, equipment availability, and surgical site. De Vries and his team found that of all of the medical errors that occured between 2004 and 2005, 29% of them could be attributed to at least one of the steps on the checklist. Additionally, 4 of the 10 deaths caused by medical malpractice could be linked back to the checklist.
Shoulder Dystocia occurs when the shoulder gets stuck behind the mother’s pelvic bone after the head exits the birth canal. Child births with high risk of shoulder dystocia include those of larger babies. In the New Jersey case, the baby weighed 9 lbs, and her mother weighed 300. It is also known that overweight mothers are more likely to give birth to heavier babies. Had an estimated fetal weight been made prior to the woman going into labor, a C-Section could have been discussed as an option. Instead, however, a vaginal birth was attempted, and after shoulder dystocia and excessive force by the OB/GYN, the little girl now suffers from from Erb’s Palsy. 
The proposed legislation would deem doctors treating medicare patients “agents of the state,” awarding the same damage capping immunity that all Florida state employees get. But a cap that only affects the recoveries of Medicare insured patients is unconstitutional, as it makes them lesser persons, unworthy of the same compensation as those that can afford healthcare. Medical malpractice attorneys have long been against limiting liability, as it allows doctors to only answer for a portion of their negligence. And if a cap on medicare insured patients is approved, who is to say what kind of an effect that will have on the care they receive throughout the state. It certainly opens up a potential for medicare patients to begin receiving subpar care due to the limited liablity doctors will face.
Haley Cobb was diagnosed with cerebral palsy shortly after her vaginal birth. Upon further investigation, it was determined that the doctor, Dr. Tara Shipman, should have performed a c-section. Failure to do so caused oxygen deprivation to Haley’s brain, and led to cerebral palsy. A 15 day trial in October won Haley’s parents, Okey and Debra Cobb, $13.9 million dollars. Also enforced was a $6.5 million dollar settlement the Cobb’s reached with other parties pre-suit. All in all, the Cobbs will receive $20.4 million for the lifetime of care and special medical necessities for their daughter, Haley.