Articles Posted in Failure to Diagnose

Timely and accurate diagnoses are critical to patient health and recovery. In other words, when physicians fail to identify fractures or other conditions on imaging studies, patients may suffer delayed treatment, avoidable complications, and long-term harm, which may be grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims. Demonstrating liability for a delayed diagnosis can be challenging, though, and typically requires compelling expert evidence, as illustrated by a recent New York decision. If you believe you or your child was harmed by a delayed or missed diagnosis, you should consult with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney about your rights and potential remedies.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the infant plaintiff was diagnosed with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI), a genetic condition characterized by brittle bones and frequent fractures, in January 2013. Before this diagnosis, the infant’s mother commenced an action on his behalf against several physicians and medical providers. The plaintiffs stated that errors in interpreting earlier imaging studies delayed the diagnosis of OI, leading to additional injuries.

It is further reported that one defendant radiologist allegedly failed to detect a leg fracture on an X-ray taken on September 26, 2011. Another radiologist failed to identify rib fractures on a CT scan performed on February 15, 2012. The plaintiffs asserted that these oversights prevented the early recognition of OI, thereby allowing the infant plaintiff to suffer further fractures and unnecessary pain. Continue Reading ›

Healthcare providers have a responsibility to diagnose and address potentially life-threatening conditions. Some doctors ignore or misinterpret their patients’ symptoms, which can lead to critical health concerns going undiagnosed. Sadly, such oversights can be fatal and often constitute medical malpractice. While a doctor accused of such errors will often attempt to avoid liability, if a plaintiff presents expert evidence demonstrating the doctor’s fault, the plaintiff’s claims will likely proceed, as discussed in a recent New York ruling. If you lost a loved one due to inadequate medical care, it is important to understand your rights, and you should talk to a Rochester medical malpractice attorney.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff’s decedent sought medical care on multiple occasions between August and December of 2015, presenting with shortness of breath, chest pain, and other concerning symptoms. The decedent reportedly visited her primary care physician, a nurse practitioner, and a pulmonologist within the same medical network. Despite the recurring nature of her symptoms and her history of hospital visits, the healthcare providers diagnosed the decedent with conditions including asthma, bronchitis, and morbid obesity without performing diagnostic tests to rule out deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE).

Reportedly, on December 9, 2015, the decedent tragically died due to DVT and PE. The plaintiff, acting as the administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a medical malpractice and wrongful death lawsuit against the involved healthcare providers and their medical group. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants failed to properly diagnose and treat the decedent’s condition, leading to her untimely death. Continue Reading ›

Medical professionals are held to rigorous standards to ensure patient safety, and when these standards are not met, the consequences can be severe. For example, the failure to diagnose serious conditions often results in prolonged suffering and may be grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims and other actions. As demonstrated in a recent decision by a New York court, all claims arising from improper medical care must be asserted in a timely manner because if they are not, they may be waived. If you believe you have suffered due to a misdiagnosis or improper treatment, it is vital to consult a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to discuss your rights.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff sought treatment from the defendant healthcare providers for a lesion on his neck. Over the course of approximately 15 visits, the plaintiff was treated by a registered physician’s assistant who, the plaintiff claims, misrepresented himself as a doctor. It is reported that the physician’s assistant repeatedly failed to identify, biopsy, or remove the lesion despite the plaintiff’s ongoing complaints. The plaintiff further alleged that the supervising physicians, who were also named defendants, never personally examined him during his treatment.

Typically, victims of medical negligence will pursue medical malpractice claims against the providers that caused their harm. In certain situations, though, incompetent medical care may give rise to a constitutional violation claim. Recently, a New York court issued an opinion differentiating between the two causes of action in a matter in which the plaintiff sought compensation following negligent treatment of a mental health issue. If you suffered harm due to delayed medical care, you have the right to seek damages, and you should contact a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to discuss your possible claims.

Factual Background of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was confined to a facility owned and operated by the state. While there, he sought medical care due to mental health issues, including depression and suicidal ideation. He was examined and released. He subsequently attempted to end his life by suicide. He survived and filed a lawsuit against the defendants, and employees of the facility, alleging they violated his constitutional rights by failing to provide him with adequate medical care. The defendants moved for summary judgment, and the case was referred to a magistrate. The magistrate filed a report and recommendation that the court grant the motion.

When Medical Malpractice Becomes a Constitutional Violation

The court declined to adopt the magistrate’s reasoning and dismiss the plaintiff’s claims. The court explained that there are both subjective and subjective requirements to succeed on constitutional claims arising out of mental health concerns. First, the danger presented by the defendant’s alleged deliberate indifference must be adequately serious from an objective perspective. Second, the defendant must have acted with deliberate indifference to that need. In other words, they must have subjectively failed to address the danger.

In the subject case, the court found that there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the objective portion of the plaintiff’s claim could be satisfied. In other words, whether the plaintiff’s propensity to self-harm or attempt suicide constituted a sufficiently serious mental health need.

Further, the court explained that upon viewing the facts in a light that is most favorable to the plaintiff as the non-moving party, a genuine issue of material fact existed as to the subjective prong as well. In other words, whether the defendants were aware of and disregarded the excessive risks to the plaintiff’s mental health and safety. Based on the foregoing, the court declined to grant the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Continue Reading ›

Breast cancer is a devastating illness that kills thousands of women each year. The majority of people who develop breast cancer do not have a familial history of the disease. Some patients, though, carry a gene mutation that creates a significantly high risk of not only developing breast cancer but also ovarian cancer. As such, doctors will often recommend that a patient who was diagnosed with breast cancer undergo genetic testing. As evidenced in a recent New York ruling, the failure to recommend such testing may constitute medical malpractice. If you sustained damages due to a doctor’s mismanagement of your breast cancer, it is smart to contact a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your options for seeking compensation.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the decedent was diagnosed with breast cancer in August 2002, after which she sought treatment from the defendant oncologist. The decedent was subsequently diagnosed with ovarian cancer in July 2007 and passed away in September 2007. It is alleged that the decedent’s only sibling underwent genetic testing in January 2008 and was found to have a gene mutation that significantly increased her risk of ovarian cancer.

Allegedly, the plaintiff then filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, arguing that he violated good medical practice by neglecting to appropriately advise the decedent to obtain genetic counseling, which may have revealed that she inherited the gene mutation. Continue Reading ›

Most medical malpractice cases resolve before they reach the trial stage. If they do proceed to trial, however, the parties will typically ask a jury to assess liability and damages. In theory, juries should assess the evidence presented at trial and make a determination based on that evidence, but they do not always rule properly. Fortunately, parties who believe a jury issued a verdict that goes against the weight of the evidence have options for seeking justice. Recently, a New York court explained when setting aside a verdict is appropriate in a medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff argued the jury ruled improperly. If you sustained damages because of negligent medical care, it is smart to speak to a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer to determine what proof you must offer to recover damages.

The History of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent visited the defendant’s doctor with complaints of a cough and chest pain. The defendant prescribed a chest x-ray, which was normal, and advised the decedent he did not appear to be suffering from a chronic or acute condition. A different doctor subsequently diagnosed the decedent with lung cancer. The decedent ultimately succumbed to the illness. The plaintiff, the administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging he violated the standard of care by failing to order a CT scan. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury found in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff then appealed.

Grounds for Setting Aside a Jury Verdict

On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the verdict should be set aside because it was contrary to the weight of the evidence. The court disagreed and denied her motion. The appellate court explained that a jury verdict in favor of a defendant should not be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence unless the evidence weighs so heavily in favor of the plaintiff that the jury could not have arrived at the verdict based on any fair interpretation of the evidence. Continue Reading ›