Sacramento Injury Lawyer Blog

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

The standard of requiring proof within a reasonable medical probability for proximate cause has been repeatedly upheld. See Alef, v. Alta Bates Hospital (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 208, 216; Simmons v. West Covina Medical Clinic (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 696, 704; Dumas v. Cooney (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1593, 1603; Bromme v. Pavitt (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1487, 1498. Plaintiff cannot recover unless it can be shown that the injuries were, more probably that not, caused by a negligent act or omission of the defendant, and this must be established by testimony from a competent medical expert.

The accompanying declaration of James Chin demonstrates his competency to opine as a board certified surgeon expert as well as his opinion to a reasonable medical probability that no act or omission to act caused by moving defendant caused or contributed to David White' death. Dr. Chin has opined to a reasonable medical probability, that The CMC’s attending surgeons and Dr. Daniel Black did not cause or contribute to David White's death.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Sacramento Physicians Fall Below Standard Of Care In Wrongful Death Lawsuit, Part 10 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

NO ACT OR OMISSION OF A DUTY TO ACT BY DEFENDANT CAUSED OR CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEATH OF DAVID WHITE

The standard of proof for causation in a medical malpractice action requires that the plaintiff prove that the defendant's negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury or harm. Mitchell v. Gonzales (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1041, 1052-53; BAJI No. 3.76 (1994).
However, a standard of reasonable medical probability was applied in Morgenroth v. Pacific Medical Center, Inc. (1976) 54 Cal.App.3d 521:

"Traditional proximate cause standards require that the trier of the facts, at a minimum, must be provided with evidence that a result was more likely than not to have been caused by an act, in the absence of any intervening cause .... We consider the better rule to be that in order to comport with the standard of proof ofproximate cause, plaintiff in a medical malpractice case must prove the defendant's negligence, in probability, proximately caused the death. The authorities in this state are in accord that in a malpractice case, a mere possibility alone is not sufficient ..." Morgenroth, supra, at 533.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Sacramento Doctors Commit Malpractice At Hospital, Part 9 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

The accompanying declaration of James Chin, M.D., demonstrates his competency to opine as a board certified surgeon. James Chin, M.D., has submitted his declaration in support of moving defendants. Dr. Chin has opined that Dr. Daniel Black and the attending surgeons from The CMC complied with the standard of care in their intervention, care and treatment of David White. The surgical repair of the stab wound to the neck and the subsequent surgery to control bleeding in the neck area was performed within the standard of care. The fact that a second surgery to control bleeding was performed is not below the standard of care given Mr. White injury.

The order for placement of the Foley catheter before surgery and after surgery complied with the standard of care as it allowed the physicians to monitor fluid intake and output in a patient who was undergoing alcohol withdrawal. Typically Foley catheters are not inserted by surgeons unless there is difficulty with placement. The surgeons do not monitor the status of Foley catheters unless they are notified of problems relating to the Foley catheter such as placement or function. David White's Foley catheters continued to function properly noting normal looking urine and normal amounts of urine the green discharge from the penis and sediment noted in the urine on January 2, 2009. When the nurses noted these changes, the physician was immediately notified. The physician appropriately responded by placing a suprapubic catheter inserted through the pelvis to allow drainage of the urine.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Negligent Nursing Staff Results In Malpractice At Sacramento Hospital, Part 8 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

The physicians order for placement of a Foley catheter before surgery and after surgery complied with the standard of care as it allowed the physicians to monitor fluid intake and output in a patient who was undergoing alcohol withdrawal. Typically, Foley catheters (tubing inserted through the urinary opening of the penis with urine collected into a collection apparatus) are not inserted by surgeons unless there is difficulty with placement. Surgeons do not monitor the status of Foley catheters unless notified of problems. There was no documentation of any difficulty with placement or monitoring of the Foley catheters used in this case until January 2, 2009. Up until January 2, 2009, the facts show that the Foley catheter continued to function properly noting normal looking urine and normal amounts of urine until the green discharge from the penis was noted on January 2, 2009.

When the nurses noted green discharge the physician appropriately responded by placing a suprapubic catheter inserted through the pelvic area to allow drainage of the urine. Treatment with multiple antibiotics including Vancomycin, Zosyn, Levaquin, and Fluconazole were started appropriately in an effort to treat the infection.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Catheter Infection Results In Wrongful Death At Sacramento Hospital, Part 7 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

THE CARE AND TREATMENT RENDERED BY DEFENDANT CMC AND DR. DANIEL BLACK COMPLIED WITH THE APPLICABLE STANDARD OF CARE

Plaintiff's cause of action sounds in professional negligence based upon allegations of medical malpractice. For a prima facie case of medical malpractice, the plaintiff must establish duty, standard of care, breach of that standard, causation, and damages. Bucquet v. Livingston (1976) 57 Cal.App.3d 914, 920-921. As a general rule, in actions based upon medical malpractice, the applicable standard of care is a matter peculiarly within the knowledge of experts ... It presents the basic issue in a malpractice action and can only be proven by their testimony, barring the extremely rare case where the required conduct involved obvious facts within the common knowledge of the layman. Landeros v. Flood (1976) 17 Cal.3d 399, 410.

In medical malpractice actions the standard of care and breach of that standard must be established by the testimony of medical experts. Lawless v. Calaway (1944) 24 Cal.2d 81, 86; Simons v. West Covina Medical Clinic *1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 696, 702. When on summary judgment, a defendant submits the declaration of a medical expert establishing that his care and treatment complied with applicable standards of care, he is entitled to summary judgment absent conflicting expert testimony. Monro v. Regents of University of California (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 977, 985. In the present case, the care and treatment of plaintiff is not an issue within the knowledge of layperson. Expert testimony is therefore necessary to establish the applicable standard of care.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Sacramento Family Sues For Wrongul Death Against Surgeon, Part 6 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

The summary judgment procedure protects defendants from spurious or meritless complaints and expedites the administration of justice by eliminating unnecessary trials. McCreery v. Eli Lilly and Company (1978) 87 Cal. App. 3d 77, 81; DeLeon v. Commercial Manufacturing and Supply Company (1983) 148 Cal.App. 3d 336, 342.

To be entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the moving party must show by admissible evidence that the "action has no merit or that there is no defense" thereto. Code of Civil Procedure section 437 (c) (a). A defendant moving for summary judgment meets this burden by showing that one or more elements of a cause of action cannot be established or that there is a complete defense to the action. Code of Civil Procedure section 437 c (o) (2); Addy v. Bliss & Glennon (1996) 44 Cal. App. 4th, 205. Once the defendant makes his showing, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show a triable issue of material fact exists as to that cause of action or defense.

An expert declaration must demonstrate the basis for the opinion; a conclusory statement is insufficient to create a triable issue of fact. Kelley v. Trunk (1998) 66 Cal.4th 519, 524-525, 78 Cal.Rptr.2d 122.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Seriously Ill Sacramento Man Suffers Wrongful Death In Hospital, Part 5 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

LEGAL ARGUMENT

SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS PROPER WHEN THERE IS NO TRIABLE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT

It is well established that the purpose of the summary judgment procedure is to "penetrate through evasive language and adept pleading and ascertain the existence or absence of triable issues." Vanderbilt Growth Fund, Inc. v. Superior Court (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 628, 637. Therefore, it is proper to grant a motion for summary judgment if there is no triable issue as to any material fact or if the action has no merit.

California Code of Civil Procedure § 437c provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

(a) Any party may move for summary judgment in any action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding ...(c) The motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law ... (o) A cause of action has no merit if either of the following exists:(1) One or more of the elements of the cause of action cannot be separately established, even if that element is separately pleaded ... (p) For purposes of motions for summary judgment and summary adjudication ...

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Triable Issues Remain In Sacramento Medical Malpractice Case, Part 4 of 10" »

It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this wrongful death lawsuit and its proceedings.)

On December 28, 2008, Mr. White continued to be severely agitated and hallucinating. He required medications such as Ativan, Haldol, and Versed to control his alcohol withdrawal symptoms. He was restrained and a sitter was assigned to sit at his bedside to prevent him from climbing out of bed and pulling at his tubing. A Foley catheter was reinserted per physician's order as Mr. White continued to pull the condom catheter out. The Foley catheter was draining well after placement. Mr. White white blood cell count on this date was 7000, which is within normal range.

On December 29, 2008, Mr. White continued to hallucinate and tried to get out of bed. The Foley catheter on this date showed it was patent and draining clear yellow urine. Mr. White white blood cell count was 8100, within normal range. On December 30, 2008, the Foley catheter was draining clear yellow urine. The urine out put on this date was 1300 cc. Mr. White was still agitated in spite of being medicated with Ativan and Haldol. His white blood cell count was 13,200.

On December 31, 2008, the Foley catheter was draining clear yellow urine. The urine output on this date was 925 cc. On January 1, 2009, Mr. White’s temperature was noted to be 103.2. His white blood cell count was elevated above normal at 18,500. Dr. Nguyen performed an aspiration of a hematoma on Mr. White’s neck to try to decipher the source of infection. This area was ruled out as a source of the infection.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading "Surgical Malpractice Lawsuit Filed By Sacramento Family, Part 3 of 10" »