Verdicts & Settlements

Our firm represented a client who entered a hospital to remove a cancerous growth on her colon.

Good surgical practice requires that a surgeon must “know before cutting” by mapping out the anatomy of the area to be operated on and, in the case of colon cancer surgery, identifying the position of the ureter.

The defendant surgeon neglected to identify the position of the ureter and cut it.  The surgeon then failed to recognize that the ureter had been cut or the subsequent complications.

Our client became gravely ill from sepsis and was transferred to the care of a highly skilled and qualified surgeon who saved her life.

Prior to the start of the trial, the defendant surgeon consented to settle our client’s medical negligence lawsuit for a confidential amount.

Settlement:
Confidential Amount

Our firm represented the wife of a 72-year old man who was admitted to a skilled nursing facility for rehabilitation after knee replacement surgery. Twenty-one days later, he died at the facility as a result of a bilateral pulmonary embolism. The nursing facility and the nurse practitioner responsible for the patient’s care denied liability.

At trial, our expert witnesses testified that embolism developed as a result of the knee surgery and the patient’s death could have been prevented if he had received timely medical attention. The jury rendered a verdict of $1,060,000 in favor of the Plaintiff on a Wrongful Death claim and an Adult Protective Services (APSA) claim. The jury allocated 85% fault to the nursing home and 15% fault to the nurse practitioner.

Verdict for the Plaintiff:
$1,060,000

A government employee’s disability benefits were terminated due to insurance company error – the insurance company accidentally relied on a third party’s records to terminate benefits. We filed an internal appeal to bring the error to the insurance company’s attention. During the process, the employee provided the insurance company with physician reports from all his treating physicians to establish disability. Despite the error and updated reports, the insurance company upheld the decision to terminate benefits. In collaboration the Washington-based law firm of Friedman, Rubin and White, we sued the insurance company. Had the insurance company not terminated the Plaintiff’s benefits it would have paid an additional $82,000 over five years. As a result of the suit, we recovered $710,000 for the Plaintiff.

Settlement:
$710,000

The Plaintiff was a University of Arizona graduate student who experienced a near-drowning at the school’s Student Recreation Center, where she was a regular lap swimmer. On the day in question, while swimming laps she sank to the bottom of the pool and stayed underwater for a prolonged period. Our standard of care expert testified that lifeguards failed to respond appropriately. Our investigation established that a security guard ran to the outdoor lap pool after spotting the lifeguards hovering over the pool and prodded them to rescue the Plaintiff. As a result of the delay, the Plaintiff was comatose and in full cardiac arrest when she was pulled out of the water. Though the Plaintiff emerged from the coma 30 days later and was reasonably functional, she was no longer able to continue her studies. Our team, composed of a water safety expert, labor market expert, neuropsychologists and economists, proved that as a result of the lifeguards’ negligence, the Plaintiff could no longer pursue her chosen career in water resource management. We recovered $600,000 for the Plaintiff.

Settlement:
$600,000

Our client was driving through a busy intersection on a Friday afternoon when another driver made a left turn across the intersection, causing her vehicle’s front end to collide with our client’s front driver’s side.

Both vehicles were totaled and our client’s ankle was fractured. Paramedics had to extricate our client from the vehicle and transported her to the hospital where she had surgery. Medical bills were $87,000.

The other driver’s insurance company denied liability and took the position that although the medical treatment was reasonable and necessary, the cost of such treatment was not reasonable. Our firm filed a lawsuit and through litigation we determined that the defendant was impaired while driving from either a pre-existing condition or the myriad of prescription medications she was taking at the time. After contested hearings with the Court, we obtained the other driver’s medical and prescription records, which indicated a history of motor vehicle collisions involving either lack of sleep or use of medications.

Our firm demanded $500,000 to settle the case from the onset. Throughout the litigation, the Defendant’s insurance carrier made offers of $90,000, $140,000, $250,000 and $280,000. Finally, with less than 4 days prior to the start of the trial, the defendant’s insurance carrier agreed to settle the matter for $400,000 to avoid trial. Our client accepted the offer.

Settlement:
$400,000

The Plaintiff was a 52-year old man who underwent cataract surgery. After the surgery his intraocular pressure rose to levels that could potentially damage the optic nerve. The surgeon prescribed medication to lower the intraocular pressure and instructed him to return in five days. The Plaintiff continued to have pain and returned for the follow up visit as directed. After approximately 15 days, the surgeon referred the Plaintiff to a retinal specialist, who immediately rushed him into emergency surgery. By that time, the Plaintiff had suffered irreversible damage to his optic nerve. Our standard of care experts were the Chair of the American Academy of Ophthalmology’s Drafting Committee for Preferred Practice Patterns for Cataract Surgery and the former Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Ophthalmology. During trial, we established that the defendant surgeon fell below the standard of care during surgery and failed to treat post-operative complications in a timely manner. We recovered for $550,000 for the Plaintiff.

Settlement:
$550,000

The Plaintiff was an elderly woman who had purchased and held a long-term health care policy for 10 years. When her insurance agent retired, a new agent convinced her to buy a different insurance policy. After three attempts to get new coverage, the Plaintiff received insurance but the agent left off information on her application. Within a year, the Plaintiff had a stroke and the insurance company denied coverage. The Plaintiff settled with the insurance company prior to trial for a sum subject to confidentiality but went to trial against the agent. The jury awarded the Plaintiff $350,000.

Verdict for the Plaintiff:
$350,000

The Plaintiff was 50-year-old engineer involved in a collision when the defendant made illegal left turn. As a result of the accident, the Plaintiff sustained cervical and lumbar strain and injuries. The Plaintiff, who had mild pre-existing neck problems, developed chronic myofascial pain, for which no effective and long-lasting medical treatment is available. We made no claim for lost wages or future medical expenses; however, the Plaintiff established that he would have to manage this condition for the rest of his life. The defendant’s insurance company offered $33,000. The jury awarded the Plaintiff $312,000.

Pre-trial Offer from Insurance:
$33,000

Verdict for the Plaintiff:
$312,000

The Plaintiff was a 69-year old man who unavoidably collided with a pick up truck that stopped suddenly in the path of his bicycle. The Plaintiff suffered a punctured lung, a broken scapula and a fractured hip. Due to a lifelong healthy lifestyle, after a period of convalescence the Plaintiff resumed most of his leisure activities. We recovered the policy limits of $100,000 from the defendant driver and $210,000 from the Plaintiff’s Underinsured Motorists Coverage.

Settlement:
$310,000

After the Plaintiff was diagnosed with cancer her insurance company canceled her medical insurance policy. The company claimed that policy would not have been issued if the Plaintiff had not misrepresented her health condition. The Plaintiff claimed that she had answered the questions truthfully and had listed her medical conditions and medications as prompted by the application. Upon reviewing the application and correspondence, we discovered that the application did not provide an opportunity to reveal any of the allegedly disqualifying conditions. In addition, the application did not ask if she was a smoker, yet the company claimed that she should have revealed that she had discussed smoking cessation with her physician. After litigation and extensive discovery, the Plaintiff recovered $250,000 and the immediate reinstatement of her health insurance policy.

Settlement:
$250,000 and insurance policy reinstatement

The Plaintiff was a 39-year old woman who underwent bilateral cataract surgery. The surgeon implanted lenses of differing power in each eye, which the Plaintiff could not tolerate. When sued for negligence, the surgeon claimed he intended to implant the lenses to make one eye far-sighted and the other eye near-sighted. We then amended the Plaintiff’s suit to bring a claim for battery since the Plaintiff had specifically rejected the Defendant’s suggestion to implant lenses in that manner. The Plaintiff needed to undergo further surgery to replace one of the lenses. We recovered $75,000 for Plaintiff.

Settlement:
$75,000

Plaintiffs were a couple in their fifties that was driving to the gym on Sunday morning when they were hit in a head-on collision by a drunk driver. The Plaintiff wife suffered aches and bruises. The Plaintiff husband developed post-traumatic migraines and other symptoms of traumatic brain injury. Underinsured Motorist Insurer offered $24,000 for the husband’s injuries and $16,000 for wife’s injuries. At arbitration, the Plaintiff husband was awarded $210,000. The Plaintiff wife was awarded $40,000 for her injuries and $25,000 for loss of consortium.

Arbitration Award:
$275,000