|
|
|
Search
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.
|
|
|
|