by Joe Quirk | Apr 23, 2026 | Medical Malpractice, Philadelphia, Successes
Mary Kay Plyter-Eigner and Emily A. Giradi obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a urology group in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. The matter involved a patient who was diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the prostate following a biopsy. The urologist recommended active surveillance but additionally counseled the patient that a radical prostatectomy would be a reasonable treatment option given the patient’s young age. After monitoring the patient’s prostate cancer for approximately six months, an MRI and repeat biopsy revealed that the cancer had progressed to an intermediate grade for which active surveillance was no longer a good option. The urologist recommended surgical treatment to which the patient agreed.
The patient underwent a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, bilateral lymph node dissection, lysis of adhesions, and cystoscopy with no noted complications. At the conclusion of the procedure, the urologist inspected the entirety of the bowel and found no perforations. There were several locations with serosal tears which were reapproximated using interrupted 3-0 Vicryl.
Following the surgery, the patient experienced persistent abdominal pain. The Plaintiff alleged that the robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy was improperly performed resulting in a bowel perforation. Plaintiff further alleged that Defendants failed to promptly diagnose and treat the bowel perforation, resulting in the need for multiple corrective surgeries. The defense argued that the urologist properly and carefully performed the surgery. Prior to placement of the necessary trocars, Plaintiff had numerous adhesions that required removal and lysis through a tedious process. Several serosal tears were noted and repaired. The bowel was inspected at the beginning, middle, and end of the case with no perforation noted.
After deliberating, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the urologist and urology group, finding that their care and treatment of the patient was not negligent.
by Joe Quirk | Nov 4, 2024 | Medical Malpractice, Philadelphia, Successes
Tracie A. Vizza and associate, Sarah Holtzhauer, obtained a defense verdict in Philadelphia County in a case where it was alleged that a podiatrist failed to appropriately appreciate symptoms of a neurological issue and failed to refer the patient to a neurologist.
The patient had seen the foot and ankle surgeon on two occasions, over a three month period and it was contested as to what complaints were made at each visit. Although the patient testified that she complained of radiating numbness and pain down her legs to her feet at each visit, the physician testified that she only first made those complaints at the second visit. The patient argued that the physician never recommended nor referred her to a neurologist for a
comprehensive work up at either visit. However, the surgeon noted multiple times in the chart and testified convincingly that he had directed the patient to see a neurologist, advising that her complaints appeared to have a neurological cause. Despite the patient’s claims, she did obtain a
neurology consult the following month after the second visit with the podiatrist, but failed to see the neurologist for several months thereafter. The patient was ultimately diagnosed with a spinal AVM and required several spinal procedures.
The jury found in favor of the podiatrist.
by Joe Quirk | Sep 25, 2023 | Medical Malpractice, Philadelphia, Successes
Carolyn M. Bohmueller and Joana Gaizelyte-Lacy represented a maternal fetal medicine specialist in a four-day trial in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, and secured a defense verdict. The claim involved the stillbirth of fetus at 36 weeks gestation. The fetus had a single umbilical artery diagnosed at 20 weeks gestation and was closely monitored. At 35 weeks gestation the fetus was diagnosed with intrauterine growth restriction. After ultrasound evaluation and doppler studies along with a non-stress test, a plan was in place to see the patient twice weekly for non-stress tests and undergo doppler studies and amniotic fluid evaluation weekly. At the first non-stress test the patient alleged she complained of decreased fetal movement. A non-stress test performed that day was reassuring and reactive. At the following scheduled visit three days later, a fetal demise was diagnosed. The jury deliberated and quickly returned a verdict in favor of the maternal fetal specialist, finding he was not negligent.
by Joe Quirk | Sep 25, 2023 | Medical Malpractice, Philadelphia, Successes
Attorneys Carolyn M. Bohmueller and Jamie N. Johnson secured a verdict in favor of two emergency room physicians and a hospital in a two-week trial in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas involving a claim of failure to diagnose recurrence of breast cancer. The patient had been diagnosed with breast cancer at age 23 and underwent surgical and adjuvant therapy. She continued to follow with her oncologist. Fourteen years later, she presented to a local emergency department with complaints of left-sided chest pain, which were evaluated and determined to be non-specific, and she was instructed to follow up with her providers. The following year, she presented again to the emergency department with a complaint of pain in her head behind her right ear, which was evaluated and she was instructed to follow up with her primary care physician. Over two years later, the patient was diagnosed with widely metastatic recurrent breast cancer in her lungs, pelvis and brain. The jury determined that neither of the emergency room physicians, nor the hospital, were negligent.
by Mark Bauman | Apr 21, 2022 | Medical Malpractice, Philadelphia, Successes
Attorneys Michael Pitt and Mary Kay Plyter-Eigner recently received a defense verdict on behalf of a gastroenterologist and his practice after a three week trial in Philadelphia County. Plaintiff, on behalf of her deceased husband, alleged that the Defendant gastroenterologist failed to appropriately perform a gastroscope and recommend surgical intervention in a patient with signs of gastrointestinal bleeding. After 20 days of evidence, including testimony from more than ten medical experts, the defendants, and multiple fact witnesses, the jury returned a verdict about four hours later finding in favor of the defense gastroenterologist.
by Mark Bauman | Sep 23, 2019 | Hospital Liability, Philadelphia, Successes
Marshall L. Schwartz and Caitlin E. McCauley recently obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a hospital in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. The matter involved a patient who developed a pressure wound during an admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). The decedent resided at a nursing home (also a named defendant) and was transferred to the hospital in respiratory distress. Notably, the decedent was 95 years old at the time of her admission and suffered from multiple co-morbidities including diabetes, dementia, depression, failure to thrive, respiratory failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Plaintiff alleged that, as a result of the wound, the decedent experienced extreme pain, suffering and death.
Plaintiff’s claims under the Wrongful Death Act were dismissed pursuant to a motion in limine filed on behalf of the hospital. The trial proceeded with testimony from multiple experts and witnesses, including an ICU nurse who cared for the decedent. Ultimately, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants finding that the care provided to the decedent was at all times within the standard of care.
