Governor Bev Perdue of North Carolina took a major step in sticking up for seriously injured victims of medical negligence within the state. Governor Perdue vetoed North Carolina Senate Bill 33 which would have capped non-economic damages at $500,000 regardless of the severity of the patient’s injuries. Medical malpractice attorneys believe that this is a great win for patients of medical negligence because they will be awarded a damages amount that they truly deserve, not a figure that was arbitrarily decided by a group of politicians.
Malpractice Reform Won’t Work if it Does Not Protect the Catastrophically Injured
The damages for pain and suffering, and other non-economic measures, would have had a ceiling of half a million dollars. Some people may argue that this is quite a significant figure, and ask who wouldn’t be happy with $500,000? Medical malpractice attorneys argue that the problem with these sorts of limitations is that they include the pain and suffering that accompanies death, paralysis, brain damage and severe disfigurement. Individuals who suffer from some of these ailments for their entire lives would strenuously argue that a jury who hears a case should decide the correct amount to be awarded, not a group of politicians in the state capital. Perdue agrees, the governor recently stated “I commend the legislature for addressing this important issue, but, in its current form, the bill is unbalanced. I urge legislators to modify the bill to protect those who are catastrophically injured when the general assembly returns.” Medical malpractice attorneys believe this is a strong stance for the governor to take to ensure that those who are truly injured by medical malpractice will not be short changed.
Medical Malpractice Attorneys in New Jersey and Philadelphia
If you or a family member has recently been the victim of medical negligence, it is possible that you would like to speak with medical malpractice attorneys. 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.
Lawyers say that Ms. Burke underwent an abdominal hysterectomy on March 22, 2005. The medical negligence occurred when a pre-operative nurse left a cleaning sponge inside the woman’s vagina which was not noticed during the procedure. They say that Burke had raised her concerns to her physician over the next two months and she went in for medical assistance no less than six times. In the months following the procedure, the woman was in significant pain and she experienced a discolored vaginal discharge. Medical malpractice attorneys also say that her vagina had an offensive odor which Ms. Burke describes as “so embarrassing“. Finally, on May 23, 2005, her doctor elected to perform a vaginal exam where he discovered the sponge. Proffesionals note that a second surgery was necessary to fix the problem and following the surgery, Burke remained weak and in pain.
Dr. Anthony Pickett, who was dismissed as a defendant, performed the circumcision on January 3, 2003 at Maternity Center of Vermont. The doctor was using a Militex Mogen clamp which removed eighty five percent of the top of the boy’s penis. The young boy’s medical malpractice attorneys said, “because of the defective design of the circumcision clamp, there was no protection for the head of the penis and Dr. Pickett was unable to visualize the head when excising the foreskin.” The lawyers working the case earned the plaintiffs $3.07 million in the settlement after fees and costs were deducted. Although the boy needs to regularly visit a physician and may need additional surgery in the future, they believe this is a great victory for the boy and a way to secure his financial future. Although medical malpractice statutes appeared as though they may limit the available recovery in this case, the lawyers were able to earn a just result for the young boy.
In August of 2002, Bruscato smashed his mother, Lillian Lynn, in the head with a battery charger and then stabbed her 72 times which resulted in her death. He was charged with murder but due to his psychological state, he was found to be incompetent to stand trial and he was committed to a mental institution. His father, Vito, then sued the doctor for medical malpractice because he believes that his son never should have been taken off of the medication. A judge at the trial court level ruled in favor of the psychiatrist but a divided state Court of Appeals elected to overturn that decision and allowed the case to proceed to trial.
Nancy Kammerer, 56, of Urbandale, Iowa, alleged that her physicians mistakenly cut part of her pancreas while undertaking the transplant procedure in 2008. Her lawyers said that her pancreas needed to be removed after this mistake, leading Kammerer into a future of medical uncertainty. Kammerer was a special projects manager at Wells Fargo prior to her surgery, a position that she soon had to give up after the alleged medical negligence. Her medical malpractice attorneys said that Kammerer became an insulin dependent diabetic, which added further pain and medical troubles into her life. In her complaint, attorneys alleged that the error was due in part to an inaccurate medical record that was in her file. It is certainly an unfortunate situation, but they say that it is not uncommon. It is important for patients who have been victimized by medical negligence to seek legal advice in order to receive compensation for their potentially sky rocketing bills. Victims often have increased hospital bills, future medical expenses, and extreme pain and suffering, which occurs far too often.
Manganiello went into Bon Secours Community Hospital in Port Jervis, NY due to low sodium levels. Saline solution should have been infused into the woman slowly because this was a chronic condition. Sadly, this is not what happened. Medical malpractice attorneys say that saline solution was infused very rapidly, raising her sodium levels significantly in only fourteen hours. Following a trial that lasted nearly four weeks, the critical care physician, Dr. Moinuddin Ahmed was found to be sixty percent responsible, while Rose Aumick, the nurse, was found to be responsible for the remaining forty percent. Today, Manganiello lives in Milford, Pennsylvania at a supported living facility. Her family is only able to bring her home on weekends for visits but they hope in the future, thanks to the compensation from the verdict, that they will be able to bring her home permanently and she can receive a high level of care from home.
With both parties meeting with an honest and neutral party, the judge, it is easier to get a true hold on how the parties can meet in the middle, at a fair amount of damages. We believe this process will probably result in somewhat smaller awards for plaintiffs but it will be paid far earlier than waiting for a verdict. Trials can drag on for years and years, this process should allow the parties to reach an agreement after only months. This will allow plaintiffs to get money much sooner, which in many cases is necessary as bills begin to stack up. Michelle M. Mello, a Harvard professor, said that “ordinarily when the parties come to a settlement conference, it’s late in the game.” This will no longer be the case with the success of judge-directed negotiations. The approach has been limited to New York City courts thus far but it is expected to spread rapidly due to its apparent success.
Since the plaintiff is the party bringing the lawsuit, the patient, and his or her medical malpractice attorneys, bear the burden of proving all of the necessary elements of the case by a preponderance of evidence (also known as the “more likely than not” standard). There are four key elements involved in a medical malpractice lawsuit.
The patient went to the Mazzocco Ambulatory Surgical Center to have the lens on one of his eyes replaced with an artificial counterpart. The operation was categorized as standard and was only scheduled to last about two hours. The anesthesiologist assigned to the man reportedly had a history of walking out of the operating room while patients were under the effects of the potent drug. In the case that lead to the lawsuit, the patient was led into a deeper level of sedation than necessary.