Virginia Lawyers Weekly

The decedent was a business executive who maintained a healthy lifestyle and did not smoke cigarettes. He was married with two adult children, one of whom waived her interests under the Wrongful Death Act as a statutory beneficiary. The decedent had a lengthy history of sinus troubles and upper respiratory issues.

He developed a dry, non-productive cough and was seen several times by the family care defendant group, including a physician working on a temporary basis who ordered a chest X-ray, which was done in-house by a technician and read by a radiologist of the defendant group at another location.

The radiologist observed a new finding in comparison to a chest film done several years prior to the one in question. The radiologist reported a one centimeter lung nodule and recommended further evaluation with a CT scan of the chest.

The same day that the chest film was performed, the doctor referred the decedent to an ear, nose and throat specialist, who examined the patient the next day and ordered a CT of the sinus.

The decedent was never advised of the need for a chest CT, nor of the fact that an abnormality was seen in the plain film of the chest. He showed up for the sinus film, which was negative and never underwent a chest CT scan. The defendant group never communicated with the decedent about the need for the further evaluation and the temporary physician left the practice a week or two after this one encounter.

Almost two years later the decedent began experiencing weight loss, shortness of breath and pain in his chest. He went to another group and was referred to radiology for a full evaluation. He was diagnosed with Stage IV terminal lung cancer. He died within approximately nine months after receiving palliative chemotherapy and other treatments.

Plaintiff’s standard of care expert would have testified at trial that the practice group had a standard of care duty to make sure that all needed studies are communicated to their patients, tracked and followed, and that the defendant violated and breached this duty.

An oncologist and a thoracic surgeon were prepared to testify that the lung nodule first seen in the plain film was consistent with a Stage IA or B lesion. They would have testified that the decedent’s treatment would have included resection of the lesion and follow-up imaging. They would also have testified that the decedent had a very high probability of cure with surgery.

[09-T-096]

Type of Action: Medical malpractice
Injury: Death due to lung cancer
Name of Case: Confidential
Verdict or Settlement: Settlement
Amount: $900,000
Plaintiff’s Experts: Family medicine, oncology, thoracic surgery, radiology and economics (wrongful death elements)
Plaintiff’s Attorneys: Lewis T. Stoneburner, Stephanie E. Grana and Bellamy Stoneburner, Richmond

Close this Window Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Print RSS Feed Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments

Connotea del.icio.us Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com

Furl Google Hugg Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

More »