LAWSUITS NEWS & LEGAL INFORMATION
$10,200,000 Settlement in Medical Malpractice Suit
This is a settlement for the Negligence lawsuit.
Washington, DC: The family of a nine-year old boy has settled with a hospital and radiologist which they alleged were negligent in detecting an arterio venous malformation in the boy's spinal canal, and which subsequently ruptured resulting in the boy becoming paraplegic.
Apparently, the boy was in hospital for a birthmark on his upper left back. The MRI indicated it was normal. However, the boy collapsed in May so a second MRI was done, which showed a ruptured arterio venous malformation in the plaintiff's spinal canal. The plaintiff alleged that the malformation was evident on the MRI, however he had not been informed by the radiologist about the finding. Had he been informed he could have undergone an embolization procedure which would have prevented the paraplegia.
The defendant hospital and radiologist denied the allegations and maintained that the malformation was outside the scope of the MRI. Further, the defendants maintained that there was no negligence since the failure to detect it when it was not the scope of the examination at the time did not amount to malpractice.
The parties entered into a confidential settlement just prior to the end of the trial, for $10,200,000.
Published on Feb-11-10
Apparently, the boy was in hospital for a birthmark on his upper left back. The MRI indicated it was normal. However, the boy collapsed in May so a second MRI was done, which showed a ruptured arterio venous malformation in the plaintiff's spinal canal. The plaintiff alleged that the malformation was evident on the MRI, however he had not been informed by the radiologist about the finding. Had he been informed he could have undergone an embolization procedure which would have prevented the paraplegia.
The defendant hospital and radiologist denied the allegations and maintained that the malformation was outside the scope of the MRI. Further, the defendants maintained that there was no negligence since the failure to detect it when it was not the scope of the examination at the time did not amount to malpractice.
The parties entered into a confidential settlement just prior to the end of the trial, for $10,200,000.
Legal Help
If you have a similar problem and would like to be contacted by a lawyer at no cost or obligation, please click the link below.Published on Feb-11-10
