Articles Tagged with Boston medical malpractice attorney

Published on:

When we are dealing with a medical malpractice cases, we are typically dealing with action founded under a theory of negligence. In a standard negligence case, the elements of the tort are duty, breach, causation, and damages. The duty is a duty of due care to act as a reasonable and prudent person so as to prevent a foreseeable injury to foreseeable persons and property.

Boston medical Malpractice In the case of medical malpractice, we use the same standard, but instead of the reasonable and prudent person, we use a reasonable and prudent medical professional performing that same procedure. For example, in the case of heart surgeon preforming an operation, a surgeon is supposed to act as reasonable and prudent heart surgeon would act in performing the same procedure. Continue reading

Published on:

In Massachusetts medical malpractice law, the “loss of chance” doctrine permits recovery of damages for the destruction or reduction of the prospect of achieving a more fadoctorsvorable outcome.

Plaintiffs are the ones who bear the burden in these cases of showing that the physician or other medical professional:

  • Deviated from the accepted standard of care;
  • Deviation proximately caused the injury (i.e., the loss was a foreseeable consequence of negligence and the negligence was a but-for cause of the loss of harm).

Causation of injuries in medical malpractice lawsuits is always proven through expert witness testimony. The loss of chance doctrine is usually applied to cases wherein plaintiff had a 50 percent or less chance of survival or some better outcome prior to the alleged negligence of the doctor. In cases where a plaintiff had a 50 percent or greater chance of survival/ better outcome prior to the alleged wrongful act, courts will usually apply the “more likely than not” standard. That requires plaintiff to prove it is “more likely than not” he or she would have had a better outcome were it not for defendant’s actions. The reason is under traditional concepts of causation, a plaintiff with less than 50 percent chance of a positive outcome wouldn’t have grounds for a claim. The loss of chance doctrine gives them a platform. Continue reading

Published on:

In Parr v. Rosenthal, a case from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, the plaintiffs had filed a medical malpractice case against the defendants in the Superior Court.   In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, The Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is our state supreme court and the Superior Court is our highest level trial court.

reflex-hammer-1421540In this case, plaintiff was born in 1994 with a large lump on his right calf.  His parents took him to Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) in downtown Boston to have this lump examined. After being examined, doctors referred the child to what they call the sarcoma group to have the lumped imaged and a biopsy taken. Continue reading

Published on:

When a soon-to-be mother went to the hospital at 2 a.m., her pregnancy full-term, she knew something wasn’t right. Her baby boy wasn’t moving as he had in the days and hours before. But when she got there, student resident doctors at The University of Chicago Medical Center didn’t take immediate action, even when a fetal heart monitor immediately showed distress. For 12 hours, no action was taken. For 12 hours, that child was slowly suffocating. pregnantwoman

When doctors finally did initiate an emergency Cesarean section, the baby boy wasn’t breathing. He was revived and then rushed to the neonatal intensive care unit and placed on life support. There, he stayed for weeks. But the damage to his brain over the course of those hours was irreversible. He was diagnosed with cerebral palsy. He can’t walk. He can’t bathe himself. He can’t feed himself. He requires around-the-clock care, provided almost exclusively by his single mother.

Now, a jury in Cook County, Ill. has awarded $53 million to him and his mother, which will not only ensure his health care is covered for the next 65 years of his life, but will help to compensate the family for the pain and suffering they have endured and will endure for the rest of their lives. Some will look at a damage award of this size and characterize it as excessive. But one must consider that not only will his future medical bills top $30 million over the course of his life, but mother and son will never have a normal relationship. This boy will never have a normal life of his own.  Continue reading