"Following an adverse liability verdict, this defendant urologist did not also want the jury deciding damages," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"Most people do not wish for their actions to be judged in hindsight; rather, if we are going to be judged, we want to be judged based on what we knew at the time," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"In this case, a key component to the defense verdict was the fact that the defendants were able to provide convincing expert testimony regarding the outcome of the decedent’s situation if the diagnosis had been tendered earlier, as argued by the plaintiff," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"The defense claimed that the patient’s kidney function was intact at the time of the CT scan and that the patient failed to follow up with his urologist," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
A pathologist and three urologists were accused of negligence in the lawsuit.
"The expert concluded that… had a urologist been consulted, additional attempts at placing a Foley catheter using a guidewire would have been made in an effort to relieve the retention," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"The plaintiff claimed the decedent’s cancer should have been diagnosed by the original urologist at least 3 years before the actual diagnosis, and claimed that timely diagnosis and treatment would have prevented the spread of the cancer," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
A tumor in a stone patient results in a $4.5 million settlement.
"The factual question presented to the jury was whether the ER doctor breached the standard of care and whether that breach proximately caused the plaintiff’s injury," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.
"In an Ohio medical malpractice claim, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of a standard of care within the medical community, a breach of that standard of care by the defendants, and proximate cause between the medical negligence and the injury sustained," writes Acacia Brush Perko, Esq.