Plaintiff: pressure ulcer led to leg amputation — $1 million settlement
Virginia Lawyers Weekly//August 24, 2025//
Type of action: Negligence and tort
Injuries alleged: Unstageable pressure ulcer of the left heel necessitating a below-the-knee amputation

Date resolved: March 25, 2025
Special damages: $190,146.77 in past medical bills
Attorneys for plaintiff: Ellen C. Bognar, Charlottesville and Randall Lee Appleton, Richmond, Allen Allen Allen & Allen
Description of case: This nursing home negligence case involves the defendant facility’s failure to properly offload pressure, leading to multiple pressure injuries and necessitating a below-the-knee amputation.
When the plaintiff was first admitted to the defendant facility in March 2021, she had no skin breakdown and did not require physical assistance with any activities of daily living.
She received antipsychotics for schizophrenia, and by December, her function and appetite began to decline, she was lethargic, and she became dependent for assistance for activities of daily living. The plaintiff also began experiencing bladder and bowel incontinence, but the facility made no changes to her care plan.
In February 2022, a podiatrist noted black eschar on her left heel and wrote an order to offload heels, feet, and ankles from the mattress “for pain relief and ulcer healing assistance.” The plaintiff alleges the nursing home failed to carry out this instruction.

A nurse practitioner ordered a wound care consultation, but the facility did not ensure the plaintiff was seen by the wound care consultant for four weeks, by which time the wound had grown to over 5 cm, with 100% slough/eschar and malodorous drainage. Pressure injuries had also developed on her right heel and bilateral buttocks.
In March, plaintiff became febrile and “catatonic like.” At her family’s request, she was sent to the emergency room, where the orthopedic surgeon determined that the left heel wound was infected, tracked to the bone, and was unlikely to heal, requiring a below-the-knee amputation. The amputation was successful, the plaintiff recovered from the infection, and the other pressure injuries healed.
The defendant facility claimed that it had turned and repositioned the plaintiff, offloaded pressure from her heels, and provided timely incontinence care. The defendant also claimed that the left heel wound had developed in less than two hours of pressure and that its deterioration was inevitable given the plaintiff’s preexisting diagnosis of peripheral vascular disease, which they claimed was the cause of the amputation, not any negligence on the part of the facility.
The case resolved the week before trial following mediation.
Randall Lee Appleton, counsel for the plaintiff, provided case information.
[025-T-118]
Related Articles
Verdicts & Settlements
- Medical Malpractice – Jurors side with doctor in suit over rescue surgery
- Workers’ Compensation- Seasonal worker paralyzed in tobacco baler accident
- Medical Malpractice- Death from cancer followed stomach pain misdiagnosis
- Workers’ Compensation – Struck in face by forklift, woman suffers brain injury
- Negligence and Tort – Group home resident falls, sustaining femur fracture
- Medical Malpractice – Nursing facility patient dies after fracturing ankle in fall
- Medical Malpractice- Patient has bladder injury during colostomy reversal
- Premises Liability- Apartment guest burned by gas grill spewing fire
- Motor Vehicle Negligence – Physician sustained hand injuries in crash
- Premises Liability- Dog bite injury nets settlement
- Motor Vehicle Negligence – Woman suffers injuries after T-bone collision
Opinion Digests
- Criminal – Man fails to vacate default judgment forfeiting approximately $21,000
- Negligence – Business not liable for failing to call ambulance
- Search & Seizure – Police lacked reasonable suspicion for stop and frisk
- Criminal – Man convicted of pinching officer during struggle
- Municipal – Heirs claim surplus funds following tax sale of real property
- Contract – Res judicata bars some of breach of contract claim
- Criminal – Circuit court’s probation decision is reversed
- Employment – Virginia court had subject-matter jurisdiction over remote worker’s claims
- Criminal – Record supports sentencing decision
- Insurance – Two carriers disagree over duty-to-defend responsibility
- Criminal – Inmate denied certificate of appealability on § 2254 petition
- Tort – Defamation suit reinstated against employer







