Spacer
PedifixBannerAS1_223
Spacer
PresentBannerCU326
Spacer
PMWebAdEW725
PMWebBannerAdvice226
Podiatry Management Online


Facebook

Podiatry Management Online
Podiatry Management Online



NeurogenxGY425

Search

 
Search Results Details
Back To List Of Search Results

08/23/2014    Jury Verdicts

Alleged Improperly Performed Foot Surgery (MD)

Alleged Improperly Performed Foot Surgery (MD)

Case Summary: In June 2009, plaintiff Katie A.
Davis, 25, a dietitian, presented to defendant
podiatrist. Davis suffered from a long-standing
painful bunion deformity on her right foot. Before
presentation to defendants, Davis had undergone
conservative treatment for her condition,
including orthotics. Defendants also treated Davis
conservatively before recommending a Lapidus
bunionectomy for correction of severe hallux
valgus. The surgery was performed in June 2010.
The surgery was to include fusion of the first
metatarsal to the cuneiform bone, shortening of
the second metatarsal and straightening of Davis'
toes. Following the surgery, Davis continued to
complain of pain and instability and underwent
revision surgery. Davis filed suit against
defendants.

Davis, who was a former college soccer player,
alleged that defendant failed to properly perform
the surgery. She claimed defendant over-shortened
the first metatarsal and under-shortened the
second metatarsal, resulting in instability of her
foot and ongoing problems.

Defendants contended that Davis presented with a
severe foot problem. They claimed the surgery was
successful in correcting Davis' weight
distribution, which was the main reason for the
surgery. Defendants maintained that measured
testing post-surgery showed the weight
distribution problem was corrected.

Defendants argued that Davis presented no proof of
the problems she was allegedly experiencing and
that Davis would always need supportive help
because of the severe nature of her pre-existing
problem. Defendants further argued that Davis did
not need the revision surgery that was performed,
nor were future revision surgeries needed.

Defendants argued that they owed no damages to the
plaintiff. They also contended that Davis was able
to participate in the normal activities of life
and work.

Result: The jury returned a defense verdict $0.

Plaintiff’s Experts: Jeffrey F. Witte, MD,
Rockville, MD, Robyn Joseph, DPM, New York, NY
Defendant’s Expert: Paul Flanigan, DPM, Portland,
ME

Source: Jury Verdicts

There are no more messages in this thread.

PICA


Our privacy policy has changed.
Click HERE to read it!