|

On December 12, 2008, a jury in a Westchester County medical malpractice case awarded a 7 million dollar verdict to the family of Theresa Capwell, an Orange County mother of three who died on September 10, 2001. Ms. Capwell had been admitted to Westchester Medical Center on September 18, 2000 complaining of abdominal pain. Apparently, although her symptoms indicated that she was suffering from pancreatitis, an inflammation of the pancreas, doctors at the hospital instead ran tests for various types of cancer, and disregarded test results which showed that Ms. Capwell did not have the disease.

When the inflamed pancreas was not treated, Ms. Capwell suffered complications, and was placed on a breathing machine one week after admission to the hospital. The breathing machine caused an accumulation of air around the lungs, which prevented the lungs from expanding and contracting. Had doctors at the hospital used a chest tube to drain the air around the lungs, tragedy could have been averted, but instead, Ms. Capwell was kept attached to the ventilator, and went into cardiac arrest. She had no oxygen for approximately 12 minutes, causing irreversible brain damage, and Ms. Capwell died 11 months later, unable to speak or leave her bed.

Westchester Medical Center vowed to appeal the verdict, which came after a three week trial and one day of deliberations. Ms. Capwell’s three daughters were 7, 9 and 11 when she died back in 2001.

According to the National Institutes of Health, about 210,000 people are admitted to U..S. hospitals annually for treatment of acute pancreatitis. With correct treatment, the condition usually resolves within a few days.

Continue reading ›

|

The United States Supreme Court ruled this past Monday that smokers may sue tobacco companies for fraud in the marketing of “light” cigarettes. In a surprising 5-4 decision considering the conservative, pro-business nature of the Court, the Supreme Court determined that several Maine residents had been deceived by Altria and Philip Morris USA into believing that light cigarettes deliver less tar and nicotine to smokers than regular cigarettes. Although it is true that the light cigarettes do have less tar and nicotine than regular cigarettes, smokers apparently compensate for the difference by taking larger puffs, smoking more cigarettes or inhaling more deeply.

The plaintiffs sued Philip Morris under the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act, claiming that they had been injured by the deceptive advertising and marketing of cigarettes such as Marlboro Lights. The Supreme Court had to decide whether the plaintiffs had the right to sue at all considering the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, which was enacted in 1965 and required tobacco companies to place warnings on their packaging and advertising. The federal law had prohibited the states from making their own similar laws as to smoking and health based on the United States Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which states that when there are conflicts between federal and state laws, federal laws must prevail. The majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, determined that the Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act was intended to prevent states from making their own laws about health problems from smoking, not to pre-empt laws such as Maine’s which establish a general responsibility not to deceive consumers.

Naturally, the four judges in the minority, Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas, sided with big business in claiming that that the Maine statute was essentially an attempt to get around the federal statute, and was instituted only to regulate smoking and health, not the deceptive business practices of Philip Morris. In a major victory for plaintiffs around the country, the decision will allow dozens of similar lawsuits to proceed in other states. Hopefully, the case will also start a trend by which ordinary Americans will be successful in holding corporations accountable for their dangerous practices.

Continue reading ›

|

In New York accident cases, the hospital chart description of how an accident occurred is tremendously important in a successful settlement or jury verdict. What I have seen over the last several years is a carelessness, or in some cases intentional effort by emergency hospital personnel to minimize, downplay, or simply disregard the patient’s description of how she or he was injured, with a serious negative impact on the client’s case. Three examples are instructive. In a Bronx County slip and fall case, our client suffered a severely fractured right arm when she slipped and fell walking down a flight of stairs. The cause of the accident was the lack of a proper handrail, coupled with stairs which did not comply with the New York State Building Code. When the client arrived at the hospital and informed the triage nurse what had happened, the nurse wrote the following: “While walking down the stairs, she missed a step and fell to the bottom of the stairs.” Not only was this inaccurate, but it of course implied that the fault was the patient’s rather than the restaurant’s for failing to have a stairway which met building code requirements. Luckily, in this case, we prevailed, but the case was defended through trial as the defendant’s insurance company relied on the inaccurate description of the accident in the vain hope that a jury would blame our client for the accident.

Similarly, in a Brooklyn slip and fall accident, our client tripped and fell on a missing piece of concrete on an outdoor patio while at a engagement party, and suffered torn ligaments in her knee which required two surgeries to repair. The emergency department’s description of the accident: “Recreational injury.” This is an example of the damage emergency room personnel can cause to a personal injury case if they do not accurately record how the accident actually happened. Insurance claim representatives and defense attorneys rely heavily on the initial description of accidents in hospital charts, and if that description, as in this case, is both inaccurate and negates any responsibility on the defendant’s fault, this has the effect of preventing an early settlement and extending litigation. Once again, we won at trial, but this was a case which never should have reached that stage.

Most recently, in a Westchester County car accident case, (which is presently being litigated), our client suffered a torn rotator cuff when another car went through a stop sign and struck the driver’s side of our client’s car. As our client was taken from the scene by ambulance before the police arrived, the police report does not contain our client’s version of the accident. The emergency room nurse, despite being told by our client that the other driver disregarded a stop sign, wrote: “Patient injured in an intersection accident.” This vague description, without any attribution of fault, again gives the defendant’s insurance company a misplaced belief that the case may be defensible–how difficult would it have been for the nurse to accurately records what our client reported, that she was the victim of a driver who disregarded a stop sign?

Continue reading ›

|

You have decided to have elective surgery, such as breast implants, a nose job, or radial keratotomy. Before the procedure is performed, the surgeon (or more likely his nurse or assistant) will hand you a document which contains a long list of potential complications and risks of the procedure you are about to undergo. The document you are about to sign is called a “consent form.” Before you place your signature on that piece of paper, MAKE SURE YOU READ IT CAREFULLY! What you will find when you read the consent, (for example in the case of the radial keratotomy), is that there is a risk of blindness, a worsening of your eyesight, and death or serious complications from the anesthesia.

Do not hesitate to ask the surgeon any and all questions about the potential risks and dangers of the surgery, and if you feel that your questions have not been fully or satisfactorily answered, walk out of that office without going forward with the surgery. Once you have signed the consent, which will state on the form that you have read it carefully and that all of your questions have been answered, you have now given your “informed consent” to the procedure. What the means is that if a problem develops from the surgery, and that problem was disclosed as a potential risk or complication of the operation, you have most likely waived your opportunity to institute a medical malpractice case as a result of your “informed consent.”

If you have been the victim of medical malpractice, contact The Law Office of Mark A. Siesel online or toll free at 888-761-7633 for a free consultation to discuss your case with an experienced, knowledgeable attorney who will outline your potential legal options.

|

According to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in which NHTSA reported on motor vehicle deaths from 2001 through 2006, there are five holidays that drivers should try to steer clear of, if at all possible. The fifth most dangerous holiday is New Year’s Day, (which surprised this writer–I would have thought it would be the most dangerous with the amount of alcohol consumed and volume of drivers on the roadways) with an average of 421 vehicular deaths. The fourth most dangerous holiday is Labor Day weekend, especially as a result of overcrowded roads and out of town travel. There was an average of 488 deaths for the 6 year period of the study. Number 3, with an average of 493 deaths, is Memorial Day Weekend, with coastal roads overcrowded with 38 million people on the roads, according to AAA statistics.

The second most lethal holiday for drivers is Independence Day, with average motorist deaths at 505. It is estimated that 53% of July 4th crashes involve at least one drunk driver. The most dangerous holiday of all? That would be Thanksgiving, with too much wine at dinner, perhaps, and possibly extra exhaustion from an over indulgence in rich foods–this holiday averaged 573 vehicular deaths over the last 6 years, and in 2006, there were 623 traffic fatalities. So please be extra careful this Thanksgiving!

If you, a family member or relative are injured in a car accident or any other type of accident, contact The Law Office Of Mark A. Siesel online or toll free at 888-761-7633 for a free consultation with an experienced, aggressive attorney who will fight to get you the maximum compensation for your pain and suffering, lost earnings and loss of quality of life.

|

If you are the victim of New York medical malpractice by a hospital, doctor, physical therapist or chiropractor, it is vital that you obtain your records immediately after the malpractice has occurred. The most important reason is that an attorney cannot commence a medical malpractice case in New York without having an expert in the that field of medicine review the records and make a determination that there was a “departure from good and accepted medical practice.” Secondly, it is a regrettable but frequent occurrence that when records are requested weeks or months after malpractice was committed, they have been “misplaced” or can’t be located when the doctor or hospital suspects that a malpractice claim is being considered.

To obtain your records from the doctor, hospital or other provider, simply download a HIPAA compliant authorization form from the Internet, write in your name, address, social security number, the specific records you are requesting, where you want them sent, sign and date the form, and give it to the doctor or hospital. In some cases, there may be a fee involved, but the doctor or provider is required to honor the HIPAA form.

The other benefit of having your records is to obtain second opinions when you simply want to get another physician’s determination regarding your medical problem or condition. It is a certainty that the second doctor will want to review your records, and you will be able to obtain a second opinion that much sooner if you arrive for your visit with the records from the original doctor.

Continue reading ›

|

According to a study conducted by the United States Department of Justice, Plaintiffs won more than 50% of state court civil trials throughout the U.S. in 2005. Surprisingly for trial lawyers such as this writer, plaintiffs were more likely to get favorable results in bench trials, in which the judge renders the decision, than in jury cases; specifically, plaintiffs won 68% of bench trials and 54% of jury trials. This Department of Justice study is the first of its kind involving general civil bench and jury trials in state courts throughout the United States.

There were approximately 27,000 civil cases analyzed that were resolved by bench or jury trials, in tort matters such as slip and fall accidents, car accidents, wrongful death, medical malpractice, and defective products cases, among others. However, the most common type of negligence case reported involved motor vehicle accidents. The report found that the number of civil trials in the United States has dropped a whopping 52% from 1992 through 2005, and the average award decreased approximately 40% over that same 13 year period.

Awards have increased in two types of cases: products liability (defective products), in which median awards were 5 times higher in 2005 than in 1992, and in medical malpractice cases, in which verdicts more than doubled during that span. As a caveat, it must be repeated that this is a national study, and thus New York verdicts are only a small percentage of the whole. Consistent with this study, I have definitely seen a substantial decrease in cases taken to verdict in Westchester, Dutchess, Rockland, Orange and Putnam counties, and jurors certainly have become more conservative in the last 16 years throughout New York State. However, I continue to believe that if the evidence is there, jurors will give just and proper compensation when the insurance company fails to make a fair settlement offer.

Continue reading ›

|

When you are in a New York motor vehicle accident, your medical bills, hospital bills and lost wage claims are paid by the no-fault insurance company, which is your own insurance company, even if the other car was at fault for your accident. Any occupant of your vehicle that is injured in this New York car crash is also covered under this provision, and makes a claim through your insurance company.

You must be aware that in order to be eligible for No-Fault coverage, an application (known as an NF-2) must be submitted within 30 days of the accident for each person making a claim for No-Fault benefits. Unfortunately, the insurance companies involved often fail to notify the claimants of the 30 day rule, which jeopardizes your medical, hospital and wage benefits through No-Fault. That is why it is vital that if you are in a New York car accident, you should consult an attorney immediately.

If you, a loved one, or friend has been involved in any type of accident, contact The Law Office Of Mark A. Siesel online or at 888-761-7633 for a free consultation with an aggressive, experienced attorney who will provide personal attention and dedication to your case.

|

If you are bitten by a pit bull in a Bronx County dog bite incident, for example, here is a list of what you should and should not do:

Find out immediately from the dog owner if the animal has had its rabies shots so you are aware of the extent of this potential risk;

Try to locate and identify any witnesses to the dog bite, and if possible, obtain the names, addresses and phone numbers of these witnesses;

Continue reading ›

|

When you or a family member are involved in a New York motor vehicle accident, slip and fall accident in the Bronx, from a dog bite, or on a construction site, for example, it is vital to remember the following:

Immediately get treatment at a hospital, doctor’s office, or clinic, as insurance companies consider very closely the time between an injury and treatment. Thus, even if you think you’re o.k., it’s always better to make sure;

Report the accident immediately to the local police, and make sure that the investigating officer is aware of any pain that you are experiencing. This is very important, because insurance companies will always make reference to the fact that the claimant “did not make any complaints at the scene to the officer.” As a corollary to this, when you obtain a copy of the police report, if there are errors or inconsistencies with the diagram or the officer’s description of what you told the officer at the scene, make an effort to have the officer file what is known as an “amended report”, so that the insurance carrier can’t use an erroneous admission against you.

Continue reading ›