Couple Files $40 Million Lawsuit Against Medical Center
A $40 million medical malpractice lawsuit was filed by a Woodbury, Tennessee couple, against Middle Tennessee Medical Center, Murfreesboro Medical Clinic and their doctor. The couple alleges the negligence of those defendants, during their daughter's delivery, has caused the girl severe medical conditions.
The couple alleges their daughter, who was born at MTMC, suffers from severe brain damage, cerebral palsy, developmental delay and seizures. The $40 million request is for compensatory damages. Compensatory damages are paid to compensate a claimant for loss, injury, or harm suffered by another's breach of duty.
The suit claims, two nurses failed to follow the doctor's instructions during the girl's delivery. The two nurses were employees of MTMC. The doctor, who delivered this girl at MTMC, was separately in private practice at Murfreesboro Medical Clinic.
The couple claims the doctor was negligent and deviated from standard professional practices too. The defendants claim the couple was negligent because they failed to follow doctor's advice on multiple occasions after the child was born.
In Missouri, the following elements must be proven in a medical negligence claim:
1. Act or omission by defendant that fails to meet the requisite medical standard of care;
2. The act or omission involves negligence; and
3. A causal connection exists between the act or omission and plaintiff's injury or illness.
A physician-patient relationship is also essential to a claim for medical malpractice. The law defines a physician-patient relationship as a consensual relationship where the patient or someone acting on the patient's behalf knowingly employs a physician who consents to treat the patient.
Often times, the third element above in regard to causation, which means that the act or omission "caused" the injury or illness, is difficult to prove. Under Missouri law, causation is determined by using the following standards:
1. Cause in Fact and Proximate Cause- this means the tortfeasor's conduct, here the doctor's conduct, must be both the cause in fact, actually having a direct effect, and the proximate, legal cause of the plaintiff's injury.
2. The "But for" Test-this means that the defendant's conduct must have been a cause of the event, that is the event would not have occurred but for that conduct.
3. Proximate Cause-conduct constitutes the proximate cause of any harm which is its natural and probable result. This has been described as a "look back" test, where the naturalness and probability of the result is judged after the injury has occurred.
4. "More Probably Than Not"—"Did"—"More Likely Than Not."- this is somewhat self explanatory in that if a court can find that is it "more likely than not" that the act or omission caused the injury or illness, the court reasons there is sufficient causation.
5. Necessity of Medical Certainty Testimony-if a party relies on expert testimony to prove evidence of causation when there are two or more possible causes, that testimony must be given to a reasonable degree of medical certainty. An expert cannot simply testify a given action or failure to act might or could have caused a the questioned result.
As an experienced Missouri personal injury attorney, I am happy to discuss your case with you and answer any questions you may have. If requested, I will immediately and aggressively take action in your defense.
The call and consultation are free. I can be reached 24 hours a day at 314.322.8515 or toll free at 1.800.500.INJURY (4658). Call me personally and I will answer all the questions and concerns you may have. There is no fee unless we recover for you.
If you don't want to call or you can't call, you can email me at john@pagecagle.com. I look forward to speaking with you and helping you through these trying times. You can also visit www.injuredclient.com for more information.
