In a medical malpractice case, a woman that was seeking migraine relief endured an unnecessary angiogram that caused a stroke, and left her without the use of her arms and legs. In a Menlo County landmark decision, the woman was recently awarded $22 million, as reported by the Mercury News.
The award is to be paid to the plaintiff, R.F., 48, by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation.
According to Jeff Mitchell, R.F.’s attorney, on October 20, 2006, doctors in the foundation ordered an angiogram of his client so that they could examine an abnormal vein in her brain – which was believed to be at the root of her migraines.
The medical foundation itself lacked the necessary facilities so the procedure was performed at Stanford Hospital & Clinics.
However, Mitchell argued, and the testimony of several experts would concur, that the vein didn’t have anything to do with R.F.’s migraines, and the angiogram in itself was not necessary.
After dye required to perform the angiogram was injected into the blood vessels in R.F.’s brain, she suffered a vasospasm and subsequent coma.
Two weeks later R.F. emerged from the coma. She woke to find that she was a quadriplegic. Mitchell said, “All she thought was, ‘Thank God I’m alive.’”
On March 19, after deliberating for three days, a Santa Clara County Superior Court jury decided “negligence (of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation) was a substantial factor in causing harm to R.F.”
The trial was nearly one month long and had heard testimony from no less than 15 experts speaking on behalf of R.F.
Mitchell said that his client’s award, possibly the largest in Menlo County history, “will provide her with just enough money to take care of her for the rest of her life.”
Eric Bailey, spokesman for Consumer Attorneys of California, said that in actuality the award will be somewhat less. He figures that approximately $16 million will go toward the plaintiffs past and future economic losses and the balance, for human suffering, will be reduced to $250,000 due to the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975.
Also commenting on the award, Daniel Smith, who works with cases related to the act, said that the judge also could lower, or raise, R.F.’s award.
R.F.’s daily life has greatly changed, both professionally and personally, since 2006: She is confined to a wheelchair, requires 24-hour care and speaking is both slow and difficult for her. Prior to the event she earned her living as a property manager for her family business. She has two children, now aged 10 and 16 – though the family unit has been fractured as her husband divorced her following her injury.
The medical foundation, per Smith, has a two to three month window in which they may appeal the decision. After that period of time, if no appeal has been made, the final judgment will be issued.
Suffering instead of healing after medical treatment? That is grounds for a medical malpractice lawsuit. Click here for our directory and contact a medical malpractice attorney today!