Saturday, December 02, 2006

My First Lawsuit

Since everyone else seems to be discussing their suits, I might as well join the fun. I was halfway through my first year as full-time faculty in the Emergency Center when the transfer came in. He was a young man of around 30 who had overdosed on tricyclic antipressants in a suicide attempt, apparently distraught over his recent legal troubles and his alienation from his mother, who had kicked him out of her house.

He had already been seen at another emergency department and been given activated charcoal at that facility; he was transferred to our tertiary care center because of his deteriorating condition (and lack of funds, surely). When he arrived, he was comatose and so I intubated him immediately. We drew some blood, got a chest X-ray and an ECG, started a bicarb drip, and sent him up to the ICU. Pretty straightforward, from my standpoint.

So when the "big envelope" was personally handed to me by the constable almost exactly two years later, I didn't even remember the guy at first. So off to medical records I went. The first thing I noticed was that he died two weeks after admission...of a bowel obstruction/perforation which had led to peritonitis and sepsis. He had reportedly developed a swollen thigh while in the ICU, and the team caring for him thought he might have a deep venous thrombosis. When the doppler was negative, the patient was started on antibiotics, but he continued to deteriorate and died a few days later. The surgical consultants failed to appreciate the obstruction and perforation.

His autopsy showed fecal material and charcoal in the tissues of the thigh, which had tracked downwards adjacent to the femoral vessels after the bowel perforated. Eventually, I was dropped from the suit along with several other of the defendants who were sprayed by the shotgun blast from an eager attorney. I never even had to give a deposition. I'm not sure if the surgeons or hospital were as fortunate.

The language in the lawsuit struck me as ironic, however. It was the patient's mother who had filed suit, and her attorney claimed that the patient "was a loving and dutiful child who provided (her) with joy, happiness, and anticipation of all the pleasures that a child can provide to parent, as well as the anticipation of care, counsel, advice, nurture, guidance, and affection."

Sheesh. He freaking killed himself because she kicked him out of her house after his latest arrest, and he was facing a long prison term. There was more crap in that statement than there ever was in his thigh. I wonder what attorneys malpractice attorneys smell like when they are autopsied. (changed in conciliation to the anonymous commenter)

Labels:

15 Comments:

Blogger Punching Judy said...

I've always assumed that lawyers' bodies simply collapse into a smoldering pile of ash upon their temporary death.

12/02/2006 07:42:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sorry that you were sued, but your attack on attorneys is very offensive. You and Punching Judy have both unfortunately fallen prey to the massive PR campaign by insurance companies and corporate America against lawyers in an attempt to shame the rest of you into not pursuing your rights when you have them. Also, the language that you quote from the complaint stems from precedent dating back to the English judicial system long before our system began.

Nice blog, but a misguided and mean-spirited attack on a large population that does not deserve it.

12/02/2006 08:27:00 AM  
Blogger Swan said...

Brave, brave Anonymous. Hmm, I haven't noticed a "massive PR campaign" against lawyers. Any advertising involving lawyers is usually focused on encouraging MORE people to sue. Funny how that works.

12/02/2006 09:22:00 AM  
Blogger A Bohemian Road Nurse said...

I find myself practicing quite a bit of "defensive charting"--ever mindful of how a lawyer might take it apart later. I also teach rookie nurses to "cover themselves and the doctor" when charting. Which translates into that we not only chart vital signs and events but that we also include quotes about exactly what patients actually DO and SAY THEY DO--things like when they declare that they willfully refuse to follow their doctor's orders (i.e. checking blood sugar), when they refuse to take prescribed medicines, when they won't follow their doctor's instructions on recommended tests/appointments, or when they say things like: "I know my doctor says that I shouldn't do such and such but I'm going to do it anyway...." It takes more time, and I certainly don't mean it in a judgmental or malicious way towards the patient, but I think it's worth it in the rare case of a lawsuit, if you know what I mean. (It's sad that charting has come to this, eh?)

12/02/2006 10:10:00 AM  
Blogger scalpel said...

The language that I write with stems from my ability to recognize a lying shitbag when I see one. It has a bit of precedent as well.

My inclusion in this suit was offensive. Portraying this felon who ultimately got what he wanted as some sort of angelic baby Jesus so that his mother (who contributed to his death) could cash in was offensive. If I had been dragged into a deposition, I'm sure the attorney would try to portray me as incompetent in every way he could think of.

You think that isn't offensive to me? Suck it up, fragile little flower, and pardon me for blowing off a little steam. That's what my blog is for.

12/02/2006 11:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Swan--so do you agree that the lawyers who defend those lawsuits are o.k.? After all, only plaintiffs' lawyers (and a tiny fraction at that) are advertising for more people to sue.

Bohemian Road Nurse--I think you are right to do this. I've defended malpractice cases in which patients try to falsely reconstruct their entire course of treatment. You ought to document everything. Again, Swan, this is the fault of the people who sue, and generally not their lawyers who aren't permitted to discover the files and the lies until after they have taken on the case.

Scalpel--Please let Swan know that you, too, are anonymous. I'm sure that your employer and patients would have you keep it that way. In any event, as I said, I feel for you that you were dragged into this -- and I appreciate that you clarified above that you take issue with malpractice attorneys. (It should be limited to plaintiffs' malpractice attorneys by the same logic.)

Fragile I am not, but I will continue to point out where I can that the entire population of lawyers (tax, environmental, family, child welfare, disability, immigration, small business, trademark, copyright, patent, construction, education, consumer fraud, and so on) are not the bad guys. Chances are you will never even encounter one of them.

12/02/2006 12:40:00 PM  
Blogger scalpel said...

Actually, I am not too thrilled with some of my defense attorneys either, which I will explain in later posts regarding subsequent malpractice suits.

I can't claim to be faultless either, as I will soon explain in the case of my second lawsuit. Stay tuned, and thanks for commenting.

I don't blame anyone for being anonymous on the internet, btw. It is a brave and perhaps somewhat reckless decision to do otherwise. I suspect many of those whose identities have been exposed would prefer to revert back to anonymity.

12/02/2006 01:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't wait to read the expose on your defense attorneys. I will certainly be back. You are an excellent writer, and I enjoy your blog topics.

12/02/2006 02:23:00 PM  
Blogger DrShroom said...

For the sake of being purely inflammatory, I'm with Judy when it comes to the death of lawyers...

12/02/2006 05:08:00 PM  
Blogger Felix Kasza said...

Here is another vote for the Shakespearean solution to the lawyer problem.

Cheers,
Felix.

12/02/2006 08:13:00 PM  
Blogger The Locum said...

Not all lawyers. The Lanarkshire Procurators Fiscal, my Dad's solicitor and my Defence Union lot are all kind of nice. If incredibly slow...

12/03/2006 05:23:00 AM  
Blogger Michelle said...

Is there a legal basis for randomly naming ever doctor in the hospital in a law suit? That seems horribly inefficient and ignorant to me. Do they just get one shot in a malpractice suit?

M

12/03/2006 08:59:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey there,

When a lawsuit is filed, each and every medical care provider who touched the patient is (usually) initially included in the suit.

This has a catchy name ~ it's called Not Leaving An Empty Chair.

The lawyer doesn't leave an empty chair because, inevitably, the rest of the parties to the suit will point to the person not named as being responsible for the outcome. (They'll point to the empty chair.)

So usually, everyone in the universe is initially "invited to the party" and then as the case continues, those who are found to be able to be dropped are. (Like you were).

Also, do not be misled by the way that the wording (about the mother and son and the care and support and such) was crafted. All that was was a restating of the basis for monetary recovery as per statute and/or precedent... it wasn't *really* saying that their relationship was wonderful, it was the inclusion of the terminology that would need to be there in order to claim future emotional damages (or whatever types of damages are awarded in your state).

If you read that part carefully, you can see what monetary damages are capable of being awarded in your state if a parent loses an adult child in a malpractice case.

Yes, under the circumstances the claim sounds absurd, and yes, they'll have a hard time proving that the two loved each other... but just think "this is all business" and you'll understand why it was stated in the complaint. In fact, 99% of a complaint is crafted based upon statutory wording as the basis for monetary recovery. Just keep chanting "It's all business" and you'll be fine.

Love your blog, by the way!

Jo's Boys
http://josboys.typepad.com/

12/03/2006 10:21:00 AM  
Blogger manchmedic said...

For What It's Worth..... Doesn't matter whether you're the physician in the ER, the RN on the med-surg floor, or the Paramedic on the ambulance that brought the patient in the first place. Jo's Boys are right - everyone gets invited, and I've been to 3 of those parties in the 12 years I've been an EMS provider. I've been dropped from suits twice for the same reason scapel was dropped from this one, and the third time I was deposed by the Plaintiff's attorney because I was the first responder who initiated his care. I was not the person being sued, but I still had to be involved, and it was not fun. Fortuntately the case never went to trial; it was settled the day before it was scheduled to go in front of the judge.

I was actually treated decently by the attorney who deposed me, but I'm certain that if I were the one being sued it wouldn't have been that way.

12/03/2006 08:12:00 PM  
Blogger Joints said...

Restricting my comment to the subject of the language of the complaint, if the statutory language required to recover damages is a lie, then you aren't entitled to recover damages...duh!

12/07/2006 07:51:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home