by Mark Bauman | Feb 18, 2023 | Legal News, Medical Malpractice
Since 2003, Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1006 required plaintiffs in medical malpractice actions to only file a claim in the county in which the cause of action arose, or in instances where multiple healthcare providers are defendants, any county where venue can be tied to one of them. Prior to 2003, venue rules were consistent with non-medical malpractice actions and tort claims against non-governmental defendants: generally, a plaintiff could file in any county in which the cause of action arose, any county where a defendant could be served, or any county where a non-person entity defendant conducts business.
On August 25, 2022, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court announced that it will adopt amendments proposed by the Civil Procedural Rules Committee, the effect of which will greatly expand which counties plaintiffs can file suits in.
The ordered revisions to Civil Procedure rules 1006, 2130, 2156, and 2179 will go into effect on January 1, 2023.
Proponents of maintaining current venue rules feared that returning to the pre-2003 status would increase frivolous filings, reduce filings to a few historically plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions, increase insurance premiums, reduce patient access to quality care, and motivate physicians to leave the Commonwealth.
Those petitioning to revert back to pre-2003 venue rules argued that there had been a significant decrease in medical malpractice filings in the almost two decades since the rule change, that the cases filed since then resulted in lower compensation payments to victims, and that there was a clear advantage to defendants.
In explaining their rational for proposing the change to the Supreme Court, the Rules Committee characterized the current venue requirements as restrictive towards plaintiffs, that resulted in their disparate treatment and ultimately less-than-full compensation for their injuries. The Rules Committee further predicted that maintaining the requirement for certificates of merit would continue to limit frivolous filings. It also proposed that concern for forum shopping should be deemphasized in favor of compensation to victims. Finally, it supported the notion that if reverting to the pre-2003 venue requirements results in negligent providers relocating outside the Commonwealth, then those are preferred outcomes that will hopefully limit future occurrences.
The adopted changes include a provision to re-examine the impact of this rule change as early as January 1, 2025.
by Mark Bauman | Feb 18, 2023 | SUCCESSES
Dan Ryan received a defense verdict in a case in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County in which the Plaintiff, the estate of a deceased patient, alleged that an Internist failed to diagnose and treat the patient’s lung cancer. The patient ultimately died from stage three lung cancer. The Plaintiff asserted that the Internist should have ordered follow-up studies as a result of abnormalities suggested on a July 1999 chest x-ray. According to Plaintiff’s expert, if the physician would have performed timely follow-up studies, the patient’s lymph node involvement would not have been as extensive and he would have had a better chance of prolonged survival.
On June 14, 1999, the patient, a 53-year-old male, presented to his Internist’s office after an illness and complained that he was light-headed, had cramping and diarrhea and had a temperature of 102 degrees, The patient denied any dyspnea on exertion or hemoptysis. The patient’s history was significant for cigarette smoking and interstitial lung infiltrates but indicated to the Internist that he had stopped smoking in 1995. The Internist had the impression that the patient had an upper respiratory infection that was probably viral in nature. He ordered a chest x-ray and blood work. The blood work was normal. The chest x-ray, performed on July 8, 1999, revealed a patchy infiltrate in the right lower lobe, which the Internist felt was consistent with the patient’s symptoms.
On July 20, 1999, the patient returned for a follow-up visit. He did not have any shortness of breath, sputum or cough. His weight was stable and his lungs were clear. At the next office visit on November 16, 1999, the patient complained of hemoptysis. A chest x-ray was immediately ordered, which revealed a right hilar mass with post-obstructive atelectasis and infiltrate, most suspicious for carcinoma. The Internist promptly referred his patient to a pulmonary specialist. A non-small cell carcinoma of the lungs was eventually diagnosed with positive lymph nodes. Despite treatment and due to the virulent nature of the tumor and the significant node involvement, the patient died less than one year later, in October of 2000.
After a six-day trial and 2 ½ days of jury deliberation, the jury returned a unanimous verdict finding that the Internist was not negligent in their treatment of his patient.
by Mark Bauman | Feb 18, 2023 | SUCCESSES
Bart C. Tuttle obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a neurologist in a medical malpractice action filed in Philadelphia County. This case involved allegations of failure to prevent and diagnose bilateral foot drop, ankle contractures and heterotopic ossification in a critically ill patient who was being treated for Leukemia. The Plaintiff was diagnosed with acute myelogenous leukemia in July 1997 at the age of 37. He received three rounds of chemotherapy and underwent a bone marrow aspiration and biopsy for treatment of his leukemia. Following the third round of chemotherapy, the Plaintiff experienced significant complications from the chemotherapy and was admitted to the hospital in January 1998 due to what is commonly referred to as a “chemo crash”. Plaintiff was critically ill, was placed on a ventilator, and remained in the ICU for nearly two months.
After emerging from a coma-like state in late March 1998, signs of a foot drop were noted. On March 31, 1998 he was transferred to a rehabilitation facility due to severe deconditioning as a result of his critical illness. During his admission at the rehabilitation facility, Plaintiff was diagnosed with bilateral foot drop, and subsequently diagnosed with ankle contractures and heterotopic ossification of the hip. Heterotopic ossification is a condition in which bone formations begin to grow, and can occur in patients who are in a coma-like state for prolonged periods of time.
Plaintiff claimed that due to improper positioning, turning and range of motion during his hospitalization, he developed these conditions as a result of compression on the nerves. The Plaintiff currently uses a wheel chair. The defense presented evidence that the bilateral foot drop was a result of critical illness polyneuropathy (CIP) and could not have been prevented. CIP is a condition that can occur in patients who are on a ventilator for prolonged periods of time and suffer from sepsis. The toxins from the sepsis cause nerve damage. The defense also presented evidence that the ankle contractures did not occur during the hospital admission, but rather during the rehabilitation period. Further, the defense argued that the heterotopic ossification was due to the patient’s critical illness and could not have been prevented, and therefore, was not the result of any substandard care.
Following a two and a half week trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defense.
by Mark Bauman | Feb 18, 2023 | SUCCESSES
Heather Hansen obtained a defense verdict for a neurosurgeon in Montgomery County. The plaintiff alleged that the neurosurgeon negligently performed a complete laminectomy with foraminotomy procedure on her, thereby injuring her spinal cord. Although the plaintiff awoke from surgery with a Brown-Sequard Syndrome, the defense contended that the operation was performed appropriately and that there was no evidence in the medical records to suggest that the neurosurgeon caused the plaintiff’s injuries. The defense also noted that the plaintiff’s medical expert had not ruled out all other possible causes of the plaintiff’s injury, such as spinal stroke. After deliberating for less than an hour, the jury returned a verdict in the defendant’s favor.
by Mark Bauman | Feb 18, 2023 | SUCCESSES
Heather Hansen obtained a defense verdict for an orthopedic surgeon in Philadelphia County. The plaintiff alleged that the orthopedic surgeon negligently opted to perform a bilateral total knee replacement despite alleged vascular compromise in the patient; and negligently ordered the use of a continuous passive motion (CPM) machine during the patient’s post-operative rehabilitation. The defense contended that the orthopedic surgeon appropriately performed the surgery as the patient was given pre-operative clearance and as the surgeon himself palpated pedal pulses pre-operatively and, therefore, detected no vascular compromise. The defense also contended that the post-operative rehabilitation order to utilize the CPM machine was appropriate and within the standard of care.
Following a five day trial, and after deliberating for a mere fifteen minutes, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defense.
