09/30/2015    New York Reporter

Alleged Malpractice (New York)

Facts: On Feb. 23, 2011, plaintiff Renee Lapin,
55, a nurse's aide who suffered diabetes,
underwent surgery that addressed her right foot's
first toe. The toe was experiencing pain that
stemmed from a bunion and a hammertoe, which is a
specific type of contracture. The surgery, which
was performed by defendant podiatrist, included a
bunionectomy and an osteotomy, which involved
shaving of bone.

After two weeks had passed, Lapin developed an
infection of the surgical area. She was
administered antibiotics. Lapin claimed that her
right foot's first toe remained painful. She also
claimed that the toe stiffened. An orthopedist
diagnosed two conditions: hallux rigidus, which
is an arthritic condition that stiffens a toe,
and hallux varus, which is a deformity of a toe.
Lapin underwent fusion of the toe's
metatarsophalangeal joint, which is located at
the base of the toe. She claimed that she suffers
chronic residual pain and stiffness.

Lapin alleged that defendant failed to properly
perform the surgery that addressed her painful
toe, that his failure constituted malpractice,
and that defendant's office was vicariously
liable for his actions.

Lapin's expert podiatrist opined that Lapin's
osteotomy was not properly performed. She
contended that the incision was too long, and she
opined that the error delayed healing of the
bone. Lapin's expert also opined that defendant
mismanaged the prevention and subsequent
treatment of a post-surgical infection. The
expert contended that defendant did not consider
the complications that could have been caused by
Lapin's diabetes, and she also contended that
defendant failed to obtain a culture that could
have allowed more effective treatment of the
infection. The expert opined that the infection
promoted excessive scarring that worsened the
surgery's residual effects.

The defense's expert podiatrist opined that
defandant properly managed Lapin's infection. The
expert also opined that defendant properly
performed the osteotomy. He contended that
Lapin's residual effects are a result of scars
that were not related to the technique that was
utilized by defendant.

Lapin sought recovery of past lost earnings,
future lost earnings, damages for past pain and
suffering, and damages for future pain and
suffering.

Result: Defendant's verdict: $0

Plaintiff's Expert: Pamela Karman, DPM, New York,
NY
Defendant'd Expert: Larry M. Silver, DPM,
Flushing, NY

Source: New York Reporter Vol. 33

There are no more messages in this thread.