Medical Negligence Issues

Published on: February 22, 2017

Court Broadly Defines “Health Care Provider,” Subjecting Plaintiff’s Slip-and-Fall Case to Heightened Medical Malpractice Requirements

Earlier this month, a West Virginia appellate court issued a written opinion in a slip-and-fall case that occurred at a hospital. The issue the court had to decide was whether the plaintiff’s case was properly considered a medical malpractice case under state law, or whether it was a premises liability case. The significance of the distinction between the two types of cases is that medical malpractice cases are subject to additional procedural requirements.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff accompanied her husband to the defendant hospital for a medical check-up. The plaintiff’s husband checked in and was escorted to an examination room by a medical assistant. The medical assistant instructed the plaintiff’s husband to have a seat on the examination table and then left the room.

As the plaintiff’s husband attempted to climb onto the examination table, he fell back onto the plaintiff. Both the plaintiff and her husband sustained serious injuries, and the plaintiff’s husband died 90 days after the incident. The plaintiff filed a premises liability lawsuit against the hospital.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 27, 2016

Court Adopts Continuing Course of Treatment Doctrine in Medical Malpractice Case

By Cecere Santana, PA

Earlier this year, one state’s supreme court had the occasion to discuss and adopt the continuing course of treatment doctrine in a medical malpractice case. In the case Parr v. Rosenthal, the court adopted the doctrine, which holds that a medical malpractice claim does not accrue for the purposes of the statute of limitations until the defendant doctor stops treating the plaintiff for the condition giving rise to the lawsuit. However, the plaintiffs were ultimately unsuccessful in their case because, although the court adopted the doctrine, the court also determined that the plaintiffs’ case was not a proper application of the doctrine.

The Facts

The plaintiffs were the parents of a young boy who was born with a large bump on the back of his leg. After several years of trying to figure out what the bump was and whether it was potentially harmful to their son, it was diagnosed as a desmoid tumor. The plaintiffs were referred to the defendant doctor who was experienced using a novel technique called radio frequency ablation to treat tumors, however, he had never used the technique on a desmoid tumor.

The plaintiffs agreed to have the defendant operate on their son. However, during the operation the boy was badly burned and the procedure could not be completed. The boy was treated by other doctors within the defendant doctor’s practice group, but the defendant was not involved in any of the boy’s follow-up care. Ultimately, the boy’s leg became infected and he needed to have his leg amputated above the knee.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 16, 2016

Determining Which Statute of Limitations Applies in Personal Injury Cases

By Cecere Santana, PA

Under Florida law, all personal injury cases must be brought within a certain amount of time. Normally, this time frame is called the statute of limitations, and while there are some exceptions, the general rule is that a late-filed case cannot be heard by the courts, and the plaintiff will be without recourse for their injuries. While this concept is a straightforward one, determining which statute of limitations applies in a specific case is not always an easy task.

Different types of cases have different statutes of limitations. One of the strictest statutes of limitations is for medical malpractice cases. In many states, including in Florida, the statute of limitations in a medical malpractice case is two years. Compare that with the statute of limitations for general negligence cases, which is four years, and it is clear why it is important to determine at the outset which statute of limitations applies. Below is an example of one plaintiff’s experience bringing a traditional negligence case against a paramedic that initially was classified as a medical malpractice case.

Aldana v. Stillwagon: The Facts

Stillwagon, an on-duty paramedic, caused an accident when he struck Aldana’s vehicle after running a red light. At the time, Stillwater was on his way to the medical emergency. Aldana filed a personal injury lawsuit against Stillwater 17 months after the accident, arguing that his negligence in running the red light caused his injuries.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 21, 2016

Florida Statute of Limitations for Medical Malpractice Cases

By Cecere Santana, PA

Florida courts are already overburdened by the number of lawsuits filed in the state each year. To help curb the number of new lawsuits each year, and to ensure that medical malpractice cases are heard in a timely manner, the Florida legislature has set out a series of rules that limit the time in which a medical malpractice plaintiff can file a lawsuit against a medical provider. Of course, all cases have time limitations, but medical malpractice cases have some of the most stringent.

These rules, called statutes of limitations, can act to completely prevent a victim of medical malpractice from recovering compensation for an act of medical malpractice. In fact, the statutes even prevent the claim from being heard in many cases. Therefore, it is extremely important that anyone who believes they have been a victim of medical malpractice reach out to a dedicated personal injury attorney as soon as possible to preserve their right to file a lawsuit and seek compensation.

Indeed, Florida medical malpractice plaintiffs must also comply with other procedural requirements, such as a pre-suit investigation to determine the validity of the claim. A plaintiff’s failure to comply with any of these requirements may result in early dismissal without the ability to refile the case. Indeed, that is exactly what happened to the family of a man who believed that the hospital treating their loved one was negligent in his care and then tried to cover up their mistake.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 25, 2016

The Summary Judgment Standard in Florida Courts

By Cecere Santana, PA

Earlier this month, a state court in Indiana issued an opinion explaining how the summary judgment standard should be applied by trial courts when there is conflicting evidence presented to the trial judge. In the case, Siner v. Kindred Hospital Limited Partnership, the court explained that summary judgment is not appropriate when there is conflicting evidence regarding a material issue of the case.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiffs in Siner were the surviving loved ones of a woman who had passed on after being placed in the defendant hospital’s care. The allegations involved the hospital’s refusal to provide the deceased with life-sustaining treatment. In short, since the hospital told the deceased’s loved ones that it was unwilling to provide life support in the event it was necessary, the plaintiffs decided to relocate their loved one, who died a short time after her relocation.

The plaintiffs had the case reviewed by a medical review board, which issued the following opinion: “the defendants failed to comply with the appropriate standard of care, and their conduct may have been a factor of some resultant damages, but not the death of the patient.” The plaintiffs cited the report as evidence that the defendant was potentially liable for the death of their loved one.

Continue reading →