Posted On: January 25, 2012 by Moseley Collins

Man Severely Injured When Sacramento Doctors Failed To Provide a Proper Diagnsis, Part 2 of 2

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiff's physicians took him back to surgery on September. 2, for thecal decompression and exploratory surgery. After the decompression of the fluid collection, he was discharged home approximately two weeks later, with minimal improvement in his condition. In mid-October, Plaintiff was seen by a neurosurgeon and diagnosed with bilateral lower extremity saddle paresthesia, penile/scrotum anesthesia, urinary and fecal incontinence, paresthesia lateral and posterior aspects of both legs and pedal and lower extremity edema. He was told that the symptoms have been present for so long that the damage was permanent.

A further evaluation was performed on January 13, 2008, in Sacramento. Plaintiff was diagnosed with cauda equina syndrome and chronic pain syndrome due to cauda equina compression by post-operative fluid following the August 19, 2006 spine surgery. The physician noted that Plaintiff manifested the symptoms of cauda equina syndrome nearly immediately after surgery. The doctor stated when cauda equina symptoms are present, the standard of care requires it to be addressed expeditiously as an emergency.

Plaintiff and his wife sued the United States (which runs the VA hospitals). They claimed that post-operative changes were symptoms of cauda equina syndrome, which is an emergency requiring prompt surgical intervention to reduce pressure on the cauda equina nerves. Further, they argued that the U.S. government health care providers were negligent in failing to timely respond to his post-operative cauda equina syndrome by decompressing the nerves in a timely manner.

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

In defense, the U.S. questioned whether negligence caused Plaintiff's cauda equina syndrome.

Plaintiff sought recovery of damages for pain and suffering. His wife sought damages for loss of consortium.

The defense argued against the extent of the damages.
SUMMARY:
RESULT: Settlement
Award Total: $800,000
The parties agreed to a pretrial settlement of $800,000.

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