Kaiser Medical Malpractice 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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Dr. Wagner opines that had Dr. Hall properly aligned the tibial component to the tibia bone during the November 14, 2005 surgery, Ms. White's femur and tibia would more likely than not have been properly aligned with the patella so that the patella could slide properly in the trochlea groove and not mal-track or sublux. Proper alignment of all of the components would not have caused her the continued severe pain in her left knee, to a reasonable degree of medical probability, as demonstrated by her recovery after the November 30, 2005 surgery by Dr. Gregory Brown.

Dr. Wagner testifies that because Dr. Brown properly aligned each of the components of the total knee replacement, and thereafter, Ms. White did well, had less knee pain, and her patella was tracking well with minimal lateral subluxation. It is Dr. Wagner's expert opinion that had Dr. Hall properly aligned the tibial component during the November 30, 2005, Ms. White would more likely than not have experienced the severe pain in her left knee and subluxation and mal-tracking of her left patella and would not have needed the three subsequent surgeries performed on her left knee on January 27, 2005, May 28, 2005, and November 30, 2005.

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

Continue reading " Medical Experts Battle During Sacramento Woman's Malpractice Case, Part 9 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Expert Testimony Establishes That Defendants reaches of the Standard of Care Contributed to Ms. White's Injuries To a Reasonable Degree of Medical Probability

Expert testimony on the issue of causation is conclusive in a medical malpractice action and plaintiff must prove that the alleged breach of duty of the defendant was a substantial factor in causing their injuries. Bromme v. Pavitt, (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1487, 1498; Dumas v. Cooney, (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1593, 1603. Here, the testimony of Dr. Robert Lee establishes triable issues of fact that moving defendant's breaches of the standard of care substantially contributed to Ms. White's injuries, to a reasonable degree of medical probability.

It is Dr. Wagner's expert opinion that Dr. Hall's breach in the standard of care in his performance of the November 14, 2005 left total knee arthroplasty on Ms. White, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty caused Ms. White injuries in causing her additional and unnecessary pain and suffering and three subsequent surgeries on her left knee. Dr. Wagner explains that the three bones that come together at the knee joint are the patella (kneecap), the tibia (shin bone), and the femur (thigh bone).

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

Continue reading " Sacramento Woman's Pain And Suffering From Botched Knee Surgery Leads To Malpractice Action, Part 8 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Plaintiff sets forth triable issues of material fact demonstrating that moving defendant breached the standard of care in their care and treatment of Sandy White through the expert declaration of Board Certified orthopedic surgeon, Robert Lee, M.D. As more fully set forth in Dr. Wagner's declaration attached hereto, he has reviewed the relevant records in this matter and is qualified to offer his expert opinions with regard to Dr. Hall's negligence.

Based on his education, training, experience, and review of the records, Dr. Wagner opines that Dr. Hall breached the standard of care as follows: (a) Negligently fitting and placing the tibial component of the total knee replacement during the November 30, 2004 surgery, and (b) negligently failing to recognize and revise the components of the total knee replacements during Dr. Hall's subsequent surgeries on Ms. White's left knee on January 27, 2005 and May 28, 2005. The total knee replacement surgery of November 30, 2005, involved the placing of three components in Ms. White's left knee: a patellar component, a tibial component, and a femoral component.

It is Dr. Wagner's expert opinion that Dr. Hall breached the standard of care in failing to properly align the tibial component with the bone. This opinion is based on Dr. Gregory Brown's November 30, 2005 Operative Report, wherein Dr. Brown noted that the tibial component of Ms. White's left total knee replacement was internally rotated approximately 20 degrees. It is Dr. Wagner's expert opinion, based on the standard of care for orthopedic surgeons as it existed in November of 2005, that the standard of care required that there be no more than a 10-degree mis-alignment of the tibial component and that anything above a 10-degree mis-alignment of the tibial component is a breach of the standard of care.

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

Continue reading " Sacramento Woman Needs Multiple Surgeries Due Doctor's Malpractice, Part 7 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Expert Testimony Establishes Triable Issues of Material Fact Demonstrating Defendant's Negligence In the Care and Treatment of Plaintiff

It is proper for the Court to deny defendants' motion as plaintiffs present triable issues of fact through expert testimony that moving defendant breached the applicable standard of care in the care and treatment of Sandy White and that defendant's breaches contributed to Ms. White's injuries, to a reasonable degree of medical probability.

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

Expert Testimony Establishes That Defendant Breached the Applicable Standard of Care

The inherent nature of a medical negligence action, along with the applicable standard of care and causation, is a subject matter that is beyond the competency of a layman and, therefore, may be proved only by expert testimony. Landeros v. Flood (1976) 17 Cal.App.3d 399, 131 Cal.Rptr. 69. When the matter in issue is within the knowledge of experts only and not within common knowledge, expert evidence is conclusive and cannot be disregarded. Huber, Hunt, Nichols, Inc. v. Moore (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 278, 136 Cal.Rptr. 603.

Continue reading " Doctors At Sacramento Hospital Committed Malpractice During Knee Surgery, Part 6 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

LEGAL ARGUMENT

The High Standard for Granting a Motion for Summary Judgment, Which Is A Disfavored Remedy, Is Not Met By Moving Defendant

Motions for summary judgment are comparatively disfavored and widely understood as a drastic measure which should be used with extreme caution so that it does not become a substitute for trial. WYDA Associates v. Memer (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 1702. Summary judgment procedure, inasmuch as it denies the right of an adverse party to a trial, is drastic and "should be used with caution ... " Steingart v. Oliver (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 406, 411 (quoting Mann v. Cracchiolo (1985) 38 Cal.3d 18, 35-36).

Moreover, a motion for summary judgment is not the appropriate method to try issues, but merely should be used to discover, through the use of affidavits, whether there are issues to be tried and whether the parties possess evidence which demands analysis at trial. Aaitui v. Grand Properties (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1369. The trial court's only function on a motion for summary judgment is issue-finding, not issue determination; the judge must determine from the evidence submitted whether there is a triable issue as to any material fact. CCP § 437c(c); see also Zavala v. Arce (1997) 58 Cal. App. 4th 915,926. If there is a single such issue, then the motion must be denied. Versa Technologies, Inc. v. Superior Court (Motsinger) (1978) 78 Cal. App. 3d 237, 240.

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

Continue reading " Sacramento Surgeons Try To Avoid Responsibility In Malpractice Case, Part 5 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during the pre-trial stage of civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of civil filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

On November 30, 2006, Dr. Gregory Brown performed a left total knee revision of the femoral and tibial components. Dr. Brown found significant internal rotation of the tibia, which was approximately 20 degrees up the tibial tubercle. The femoral component was also found to be internally rotated about 5 degrees. As such, Dr. Brown decided to perform revision of the tibial and femoral components to provide further stability to Ms. White's patella rather than do a tibial tubercle osteotomy. . His post-operative diagnosis was dislocation of the patellar component status post total knee arthroplasty and malalignment of the left total knee arthroplasty components. . Ms. White was discharged after almost one week on December 5, 2006 with instructions to follow up, receive home health care and physical therapy, and have a home safety evaluation.

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

Continue reading " Doctor's Negligent Knee Arthroplasty Leaves Sacramento Woman Little Choice But To Sue, Part 4 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

In the months after the May 28, 2005 surgery by Dr. Hall, Ms. White experienced intensified pain in her left knee and continued to have problems with the maltracking of that patella. Ms. White had difficulty walking, squatting, kneeling, pushing, pulling, and sitting or standing for prolonged periods, and had a burning pain which radiated down the lateral aspect of her lower leg from the knee to her ankle with numbness on the plantar aspect of her left foot. On November 23, 2005, Ms. White was noted to have recurrent lateral dislocation of patella, status post total knee replacement and revision. She was referred to orthopedic specialist for a second opinion.

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

On February 3, 2006, Ms. White presented to orthopedic specialist, Dr. Michael Young, for a second opinion. Dr. Young noted that Ms. White's patella was dislocated laterally, and when compared to October of 2005 it was worse due to the wear.

On June 2, 2006, Ms. White presented to orthopedist Dr. Gregory Brown at UCI Medical Center for another opinion, whose impression was that Ms. White either had malpositioning of the femoral and/or tibial component, which could be accounted for both components being internally rotated on the respective positions.

Continue reading " Surgical Patient In Sacramento Files Malpractice Action After Multiple Procedures, Part 3 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

STATEMENT OF FACTS

In November of 2004, Sandy White was scheduled for a left total knee arthroplasty by orthopedic surgeon, William Hall, M.D., after findings of moderate degenerative joint disease involving all three joint compartments in her left knee. On November 14, 2004, Dr. William Hall performed a total knee replacement on Ms. White's left knee.

In the months following the November 14, 2004 surgery by Dr. Hall, Ms. White continued to have pain in her left knee and maltracking of her left patella. Dr. Hall discussed the issue of patellar subluxation with Ms. White, when she presented to the clinic with complaints that her left knee felt like it would buckle at times. Dr. Hall recommended and performed arthroscopy with lateral release of the left patella on Ms. White on January 27, 2005. Dr. Hall noted that the prosthesis appeared intact and in good position except the patella which was noted to be certainly maltracking and subluxing laterally. Moreover, it was noted that Ms. White's flexion was limited. Dr. Hall performed lateral release under vision which he noted to be very complete proximally and distally and that this improved the position and tracking of the patella significantly and achieved 90-95 degrees flexion.

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

Continue reading " Botched Knee Replacement Surgery Leads To Sacramento Malpractice Suit, Part 2 of 9 " »

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 personal injury case and its proceedings.)

Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant, William Hall, M.D's, Motion for Summary Judgment; Points and Authorities.

Plaintiff, Sandy White, hereby opposes Defendant William Hall, M.D.'S Motion for Summary Judgment. This Opposition is made on the grounds that there exist numerous triable issues of material fact demonstrating that Dr. Hall breached the applicable standard of care in the community in the care and treatment of Ms. White and that these breaches of the standard of care either caused and/or contributed to Ms. White's injuries. As such, plaintiff respectfully requests that the court deny Dr. William Hall's motion for summary judgment.

This Opposition is based upon this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declarations of Robert Lee, M.D., and Abbey Smith, Esq., the Separate Statement of Disputed Material Facts filed concurrently with this Opposition, and such other oral and documentary evidence as may be presented before or at the time of hearing of this Motion.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, Sandy White, has brought this medical malpractice action against Dr. William Hall based on his professional malpractice in his care and treatment of Ms. White. Plaintiff originally filed this action on April 27, 2007, with trial in this matter scheduled for February 25, 2009.

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

Continue reading " Sacramento Woman Files Medical Malpractice Suit Against Surgeon, Part 1 of 9 " »