Why Medical Malpractice Caps are Bad for YOU!

Fig 17:Shews the Method of amputating the Grea...

Image via Wikipedia

In my 25 years of practice I have never seen a proposed NY  ”law” that is so anti-consumer, so anti-taxpayer and so pro-insurance company as the proposed caps on damages in medical malpractice cases.

These caps are buried within Governor Cuomo’s budget.  You might quite logically wonder why sweeping changes to the law are found in a “budget” but the short-answer is “Albany politics at its worst”!  In an effort to cut a Medicaid “deal” with the hospitals, Governor Cuomo gave in to a demand from the hospitals that he reverse hundreds of years of NY law to impose a cap on damages in medical malpractice cases.

SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR DR’S OR HOSPITALS BUT NOT FOR YOU OR ME…..

These proposed medical malpractice caps means if a Dr or a hospital screws up and hurts you, your non-economic damages are artificially and arbitrarily capped at just $250,000.  Interestingly, this protection only applies to Dr’s and hospitals.  So if I screw up as a lawyer and commit malpractice you can recover for the FULL amount of your damages with no caps.  If an accountant, an architect, a mechanic or ANYONE else (other than a Dr. or a hospital) screws up and hurts you, you can collect 100% of your damages with no caps.  But if you are a Dr. or a hospital you get special protections that apply to no one else.  How is that fair?

CAPS MEAN MORE COSTS WILL BE SHIFTED FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES TO THE TAXPAYER……

For 25 years I have represented the injured in the Southern Tier of NY and Northern Tier of PA.  I have represented babies brain-damaged due to medical malpractice.  I have represented the elderly who have suffered amputations because a nurse failed to monitor an infected wound.

Young or old, I have proudly represented these injured folks knowing that the settlements or verdicts obtained from the insurance companies for the wrong-doers would be paying the bills for my injured client rather than the taxpayers footing the entire bill through Medicare or Medicaid.

But all of that is about to change if  these caps are approved.  Now, settlements from insurance companies will be smaller meaning that the victim will have less resources available to pay their own bills.  It means those bills for their needs will be turned over to Medicare or Medicaid.  That means that taxpayers, rather than the insurance companies for the wrong-doers will be paying the bills.  How is that fair?  Isn’t it more fair that the person responsible for causing the injury pay for the damage they have caused rather than putting this burden on the taxpayer?

HERE IS A LETTER I AM SENDING TO MY CLIENTS ASKING THEM TO OPPOSE THESE CAPS……I HOPE YOU TOO WILL OPPOSE THESE CAPS…….

The health care industry is lobbying state legislators in Albany to pass a bill which would severely limit the rights of all victims of medical malpractice.

The proposed bill would limit or “cap” pain and suffering compensation in all medical malpractice cases to $250,000, even for the most damaging medical mistakes, including those that leave a patient blind, paralyzed, brain damaged, disfigured, infertile or otherwise gravely injured for life.  Caps would shield doctors and hospitals from the full consequences of their negligence.

This bill would also take away the rights of babies who suffer brain damage at birth due to medical negligence to be fully compensated in a court of law for their injuries. Instead, these children would receive very limited coverage for their future medical costs from a newly created state bureaucratic fund — under conditions which would ensure that they will never receive the quality of care they need and deserve.  Meanwhile, negligent hospitals and doctors will not be responsible for paying any of those costs. That’s wrong.

If hospitals, doctors and insurance companies want to save money it should not be on the backs of innocents victims of medical negligence. The best solution to reducing costs is to reduce medical errors and the injuries they cause.

Tell Albany: Protect Victims and Stand up for Patients Rights.

Please write your state legislators and urge them to vote “NO” to arbitrary caps on damages and “NO” to taking away the rights of brain damaged babies, by clicking on to:

www.protectnypatients.org

Thanks for reading, Jim
_________________________________
James B. Reed
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and
NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

NY Medical Malpractice Lawyer: Don’t Let NY Take Away Your Rights!

NEW YORK - NOVEMBER 02:  New York Governor-ele...

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

Mid-March is usually a time when we say good-bye to snow, prepare for St. Patrick’s Day, and dream of warmer weather.  But while the rest of NY is slowly awakening from its winter daze, some lawmakers in Albany are trying to strip you of your rights.

Governor Cuomo has proposed a $250,000.00 cap on non-economic damages as part of his proposed budget.  He claims that this will somehow save the state money, despite the fact that such caps have never done so in any other state where they have been enacted.  NY doctors and hospitals already receive greater protection than any other profession in the entire state.  NY doctors and hospitals are already protected by shorter statutes of limitations and procedural prerequisites that don’t exist anywhere else.  NY already restricts medical malpractice claims more than many states; doctors are not fleeing NY, and NY has no medical malpractice insurance crisis.  In short, there is no medical malpractice crisis in NY!

So why is Gov. Cuomo trying to put a cap on damages?  As a NY medical malpractice lawyer, this had me scratching my head as well.  Ralph Nader has an interesting take that I wanted to share with you:

Selling Out Injured Baby Rights
from www.nader.org
By RALPH NADER
New York State’s Governor Andrew Cuomo will be judged harshly by history if he doesn’t reverse his position supporting limiting the legal rights of brain damaged babies. Imagine a life-time $250,000 cap on pain and suffering and families having to endure a burdensome and humiliating struggle to get medical bills paid as they arise from an insurance funded entity.

Governor Cuomo is hiding behind the recommendations of his Medicaid Redesign Team, which has more than a sprinkling of hospital and industry lobbyists, and which was the stalking horse for this heartless proposal.

Why you might ask would Andrew Cuomo, the son of Mario Cuomo, a man widely regarded as a champion of the underdog, advance such a mean-spirited and wrong-headed measure?

The short answer: political expediency. Credible observers say Governor Cuomo needs to give the health insurance industry a financial benefit in exchange for the health insurance industry not economically punishing hospitals workers. And to top it off with a touch that would make Machiavelli proud, the Governor placed this initiative in his budget proposal. This means that for the New York State Assembly and Senate to vote against this draconian measure used to seal a political deal, the legislators would have to vote down the entire state budget.

It is shameful that the Governor would use his creativity and intellect to help the health industry at the expense of helpless babies who are victims of medical malpractice.

Many in the health care and insurance industry seem to regard the civil justice system as a nuisance that threatens to destroy our economy and way of life. In reality, America’s civil justice system plays an indispensable role. When the rights of injured consumers are vindicated in court, our society benefits in countless ways: compensating victims and their families for shattering losses (with the cost borne by the wrongdoers rather than taxpayers); preventing future injuries by deterring dangerous health care and other practices, spurring safety innovation; and educating the public to risks associated with certain products and services. These legal rights provide society with its moral and ethical fiber by defining appropriate norms of conduct.

Governor Cuomo needs to review the facts on medical malpractice. First he should know that supporters of tort “deform” invoke one myth after another: a litigation explosion, juries automatically ruling in favor of plaintiffs and routinely awarding punitive damages, an economy shattered by these awards. Each of these notions is demonstrably false. Only a tiny percentage of persons injured bring lawsuits, and an even tinier percentage of those who do receive large verdicts. Limiting victims’ rights is an anti-democratic solution to a trumped-up problem.

Second, a driving force behind this dishonest campaign is the insurance industry. Whenever, over the years, insurers face low interest rates and declining stock investments, they start the drumbeat against justice for victims. They’ve made a particular cause against liabilities for medical malpractice. Instead of demanding disciplinary action against incompetent physicians, urging medical associations to police their own ranks, the insurance industry lobbies state and federal legislatures to curtail victims’ rights and remedies in courts of law. At the insurance industry’s behest, their physician policyholders have joined the call.

Why do physicians allow themselves to be tools of insurance companies that gouge them especially when they are not among the incompetent few who account for most malpractice claims (five percent of doctors are involved in roughly 50 percent of malpractice payouts)? One answer is that insurance companies frighten physicians with false data suggesting that malpractice suits run amok. A persuasive case can be made that there are far too few malpractice suits. The 1999 Institute of Medicine study estimated that gross malpractice in hospitals alone takes up to 98,000 American lives a year and causes hundreds of thousands of serious injuries. Yet various studies show that roughly 90% of people harmed by medical malpractice do not even file suit.

If you total the entire amount of premiums physicians pay in a year for their malpractice insurance and divide it evenly by all the physicians practicing in the United States, the average annual premium is less than $10,000 per doctor. Very manageable. So why are some doctors paying $50,000 or $100,000 a year to their malpractice insurers? Because the profit hungry companies have learned to over-classify their risk pools, thereby charging exorbitant amounts to specific specialists like obstetricians and orthopedic surgeons. In addition, because insurers fail to surcharge the few incompetent physicians in these specialties, the competent specialists pay for more than they should.

There is another benefit to the insurance industry from this kind of over-classification. When obstetricians are gouged, they protest loudly, threaten not to deliver babies, and sometimes actually go on strike. This makes great television — crying babies and physicians in their garb blaming lawyers – and deflects blame from the insurers, who laugh their way to the bank. In recent years, their profits have soared.

Neither organized medicine nor the insurance companies go after bad doctors. The AMA’s web site does not report any data about incompetent or crooked physicians, and the insurance companies have shown little interest in loss prevention. Instead, both physicians’ and insurers’ lobbies fund and press legislators to enact laws that politicize the courts, tie the hands of judges and juries, and make it harder for innocent people or children to receive just compensation for their tragic suffering.

Isn’t it time to focus on malpractice prevention instead of trying to hamstring hundreds of thousands of Americans harmed by their doctors’ negligence? Are malpractice awards the national crisis physicians and insurers suggest? In fact, the entire medical malpractice insurance industry payout to victims in verdicts and settlements is about $5 billion a year (substantially less than the amount our the country spends on dog food). Isn’t it time to focus on malpractice prevention instead of trying to restrict the rights of hundreds of thousands of Americans harmed by their doctors’ negligence?

We need to ask whether proposed reforms level the playing field or tilt an already un-level field even further by making it more difficult for wrongfully injured citizens to receive justice from the perpetrators of their harms.

The tort deform movement amounts to a perverse rewriting of history. Tort law produced decades of slow but steady progress in state after state respecting the physical integrity of human beings against harm by recognizing that even the weak and defenseless deserve justice. Instead of seeing this evolution as a source of national pride, a coalition of insurance companies, corporate defense lobbies, and craven politicians depict it as an accountability that must be stripped.

If this campaign succeeds, the results are sadly predictable. Tort reform means less deterrence, which means more injuries, more uncompensated victims, and tremendous overall costs transferred to society.

Send the governor a letter and remind him an important part of being a leader is defending the defenseless. His address is:

The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo of New York State
State Capitol Building
Albany, NY 12224

Ralph Nader is the founder of the Center for Study of Responsive Law, in Washington.

Food for Thought.

Thanks for reading,

Adam
_______________________________
Adam M. Gee, Esq.
NY and PA Medical Malpractice Attorney
The Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William Street
Elmira, NY  14901
Phone: (607)733-8866
Fax: (607)732-6062
Email: agee@zifflaw.com
www.zifflaw.com


Pennsylvania Tanker Crash Is a BAD Sign of the Changing Times

Tioga County Tanker Truck Rearends Car

A horrific rear-end tanker truck crash in Tioga County, PA forced the emergency airlift of two young men from Wellsboro.  Sad to say but I think this crash, and many other recent crashes like it, are just the tip of the iceberg for what I expect will be MANY more serious truck vs. car accidents in our area.

As an injury lawyer who has handled countless New York and Pennsylvania car crash cases over the last 25 years, I have started to see a disturbing new trend of many more large truck vs. small car accidents.  This trend is the direct result of the greatly increased truck traffic in the Twin Tiers area due to the gas and oil exploration and drilling.  Everywhere you go in the area– Elmira, Horseheads, Corning, Wellsboro, Towanda, Waverly– you see huge trucks– tankers, dumptrucks, drilling rigs– and you see the effects of all this truck traffic– crumbling roads, mud smeared roads, leaking fluids.  But we are also seeing a huge increase in very seriously people due to car and truck crashes.  Car accidents always have the potential for serious injury but when you combine the substantial weight of these big trucks running in to much smaller vehicles you have the recipe for disaster– catastrophic injuries and death.

Although many in the community talk about the good things that the gas drilling can bring to the area, many forget about the downsides.  Sad to say but I fear that we are going to see more of our friends and neighbors injured by big truck accidents.  We all know that these big trucks are often going too fast, can’t slow down as quickly as a car and are often operated by tired drivers who are working 12 hours shifts 14 days in a row.

Like I said, this is a recipe for disaster……  Now don’t get me wrong, as an injury attorney handling truck accident cases, I know this trend will be good for my business but as someone who lives here, whose family lives here, whose friends live here, I am deeply concerned about local safety.  Long ago, I learned that if I do a good job for my clients, I will have no shortage of work and fortunately that has always proved to be true.  Accordingly, I can honestly say that I am not looking to see any more people injured and I would be quite happy to see fewer injured people.  In fact, as someone who sees first-hand the devastation suffered by the seriously injured, I do everything in my power to educate people to be as safe as possible to avoid injury.  But what I know is that none of us can control the actions of other drivers and that’s why I am so concerned about the local consequence of the increased truck traffic.  I hope I am wrong about this trend……..

Thanks for reading, Jim
_________________________________
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)

Here is the story by the Elmira Star-Gazette that got me thinking about this issue as posted:

Two injured when water tanker hits car in Tioga County

A Wellsboro teenager and his passenger were injured Tuesday when the car they were in was rear-ended by a water truck in Richmond Township, Tioga County, Pa.

State police at Mansfield said Michael T. Watkins, 19, and Joshua E. Bailey, 22, were airlifted to Robert Packer Hospital in Sayre after the crash, which occurred near U.S. Route 6 and Westgate Road.

The crash took place around 10:50 a.m. when the water truck struck the rear of the passenger car, operated by Watkins, as the car was waiting to turn onto Westgate Road.

Watkins and Bailey were extricated from their vehicle by mechanical means and were flown to Robert Packer Hospital by Guthrie Air and Lifeflight.

Watkins was treated at the hospital and discharged. Bailey was transferred to another hospital. A Packer nursing supervisor would not say where Bailey was transferred.

The truck operator, Michael Brostrom, 37, of Wellsboro, was ticketed for driving at an unsafe speed.

Police said Watkins was not wearing his seat belt.


Wall Street Journal Reports: Malpractice Claims Push Physicians to Make More Accurate Diagnoses

I just came across a very interesting article in the Wall Street Journal about medical malpractice.

This article discloses an important truth about the medical malpractice system, which allows patients to seek redress after health care mistakes. The money that is paid out in medical malpractice claims is a very, very strong incentive for doctors and hospitals to improve their methods. Medical malpractice claims aren’t just reactive – they have a proactive effect on health care.

The Wall Street Journal article, “What the Doctor Missed: Using Malpractice Claims to Help Physicians Avoid Diagnostic Mistakes, Delays” by Laura Landro, looks specifically at diagnostic errors. We have all heard horror stories about doctors who have fallen asleep while performing surgery or been under the influence of drugs or alcohol while practicing. Diagnostic errors may be more subtle, but the results can be just as devastating. Think of the breast cancer victim who believes a lump is just a cyst, or the person with a rare blood disorder that dies with it undiagnosed because specialists didn’t share information. These aren’t cases of bad or evil doctors. They’ve probably saved the lives of many other patients. The problem is, when these doctors do slip up, there’s lives at stake.

Let me outline some of the key points of the article:

  1. Diagnostic errors are rampant and costly. Landro’s article reports that, according to studies of resolved claims, diagnostic errors make up 40 percent of malpractice cases, and cost an average of $300,000 to settle.
  2. Malpractice claims are a driving force behind the development of new diagnostic methods, equipment and tracking systems. Doctors are looking into any effective means for identifying potential problems and carefully following up with patients. Some are trying electronic alerts, while others are using checklists to follow tried and true methodology.
  3. Mistakes in diagnosis are far too frequent, and reflect core problems in our health-care system. Primary-care doctors are overloaded with patients and paperwork. Test results are lost. Follow-up exams aren’t ordered. It’s discouraging, but Landro points out that hospitals and insurance companies are pressing for improvements because they don’t want to face frequent claims.

When you hear someone complain or theorize that malpractice claims are driving up the cost of health care, think about the efficiencies and improvements our system has brought about.

Medical malpractice claims can be good for medicine, good for the patients that rely and trust in their physicians, and good for the doctors who need reliable systems of managing and tracking an unbelievable amount of patient information.

Thanks for reading,

Christina Sonsire

NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William Street
Elmira, New York 14902-1338
csonsire@zifflaw.com
Office: 607.733.8866
Toll-Free: 800.ZIFFLAW (943.3529)
Web: zifflaw.com
Blog: NYInjuryLawBlog.com


PUNITIVE DAMAGES IN NY: A TOUGH ROAD

Statue of Liberty National Monument, Ellis Isl...
Image via Wikipedia

I am in the process of drafting a complaint against a doctor, nurse and hospital for extremely egregious medical malpractice that led to the premature and unnecessary death of an Elmira man.  Included in my complaint is a claim for punitive damages.

In drafting the complaint I did a fair amount of research about punitive damages in New York, and learned several helpful tips for both practitioners and potential claimants.

At the onset, it is critical to understand what punitive damages are designed to do as well as the strict limitations New York Courts apply in their application.  New York’s tort system (the system that allows injured people to recover against the people or entities that caused their injuries through negligence, malpractice and intentional conduct,) generally allows an injured person to only be compensated for actual economic and non-economic injuries directly related to his or her injuries.  These types of damages are called “compensatory damages” because they are designed to compensate victims.  Compensatory damages include such things as lost wages, medical bills, pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life and future treatment costs.

Punitive damages, on the other hand, are designed to punish and deter the wrongdoer or “tortfeasor”.  In other words, the purpose of awarding punitive damages is to send a message to the torfeasor and all similarly situated persons or entities that the conduct alleged is so egregious and unacceptable as to require punishment in order to deter others from engaging in the same types of acts.

In 2008 the New York Law Journal published a very interesting article called “The Rules On Punitive Damages.”  In this article authors Steven Napalitano and Hayden Coleman explain, “[t]hese damages, also known as exemplary damages, serve a dual purpose: first, to punish the tortfeasor, and second, to deter both the wrongdoer and others similarly situated from engaging in the same conduct in the future.”

There is no question the bar for allowing an injured person to recover punitive damages in New York is set very high.  In a recent landmark case, New York’s Court of Appeals (the highest court in New York) observed:

“Punitive damages are permitted when the defendant’s wrongdoing is not simply intentional but evince[s] a high degree of moral turpitude and demonstrate[s] such wanton dishonesty as to imply a criminal indifference to civil obligations”. (Ross v Louise Wise Serv., Inc., 8 NY3d 478, 489, quoting Walker v Sheldon, 10 NY2d 401, 405; see Prozeralik v Capital Cities Communications, 82 NY2d 466, 479; Sharapata v Town of Islip, 56 NY2d 332, 335).

Indeed, Napalitano and Coleman assert “New York courts have strictly limited punitive awards to the most reprehensible instances of wrongdoing; they are only awarded in cases involving gross, wanton or willful fraud, or other morally culpable conduct.”

So, the question emerges: are punitive damages appropriate in my case?  Of course, the analysis required to answer this question must be performed on a case-by-case basis.  However, there are a few general considerations every practitioner and potential claimant should keep in mind:

1.   Does the conduct warrant punitive damages?

This is the million dollar (figuratively speaking, of course) question.  In many ways the answer starts in your gut.  Do the tortfeasor’s actions make you mad? Really mad?  Seething mad?  Do they make you want to call the newspaper and the cops and 20/20 because this sort of thing should never happen in the USA?  If the answer is a resounding yes, then perhaps you have a claim.

Much more critically, do the torfeasor’s actions make your 72 year-old/very fiscally conservative/wary of lawsuits/cheerleader of tort reform mother-in-law seething, red-faced mad?  Too often we see our cases through a rose-colored lens, and, after having sat with a grief-stricken family, believe punitive damages are a given.  They’re not.  Ever.  Vet your case out to your neighbors, your families, your colleagues.  Become part of some active list-serves.  Read verdict sheets.  There is simply no substitute for good old research.  It can save you a lot of time (and face) down the road when you are answering the summary judgment motion the defendant will surely bring.

2.   Would the conduct have made your mother-in-law seething, red-faced mad at the time it occurred?

Do not overlook this step!  Determine when the conduct occurred.  Is this a toxic tort case that involved conduct in the 1950’s?  Is this an asbestos case where the building was erected 50 years ago?

According to Napalitano and Coleman, “a claimant should be precise in defining the time period of the conduct allegedly justifying punitive damages. In cases where the conduct at issue happened many years ago, as is often the case in the toxic tort context, a plaintiff must be prepared to show that the conduct was outrageous based on the norms and knowledge then prevailing. Defense counsel may seek to engage an expert witness to establish that the conduct was not sufficiently malicious or vindictive at the time. Finally, if circumstances have changed so that the allegedly offending conduct could not happen today, as with a change in the law, defense counsel may properly assert that the goal of deterring future improper conduct cannot be satisfied.”

3.   Is the claim for punitive damages insured?

As usual, insurance is the 110 pound gorilla in the room.  It is one thing to be a crusader and secure a 10 million dollar punitive damages verdict for your client, but a whole other beast to actually translate the judgment into money your client can take to the bank.

Unfortunately, it appears claims for punitive damages are generally uninsurable in New York.  New York’s Court have ruled the public policy underlying a claim for punitive damages – that tortfeasors actually endure punishment in order to deter future bad conduct – is eradicated if insurance companies simply pick up the tab.

The law firm McCullough, Campbell & Lane, LLP created a detailed list of the rules governing the interplay of punitive damages and insurance in all 50 states, including New York:

Directly assessed punitive damages are not insurable in New York. See Public Service Mut. Ins. Co. v. Goldfarb, 425 N.E.2d 810 (N.Y. 1981); Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Village of Hempstead, 397 N.E.2d 737 (N.Y. 1979); Soto v. State Farm Ins. Co., 600 N.Y.S.2d 407 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993), aff’d 635 N.E.2d 1222 (N.Y. 1994); National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. Ambassador Group, Inc., 556 N.Y.S.2d 549 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990), appeal dismissed, 571 N.E.2d 85 (N.Y. 1991).

In addition, the court in Home Ins. Co. v. American Home Products Corp., 550 N.E.2d 930 (N.Y. 1990), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 902 F.2d 1111 (2d Cir. 1990), applied the prohibition to out-of-state punitive damages awards for which the insured seeks coverage in New York. The court pointed out that “the punitive nature of the award, coupled with the fact that a New York insured seeks to enforce it in New York against a New York insurer … calls for the application of New York public policy.” 550 N.E.2d at 933. See Zurich Ins. Co. v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., 642 N.E.2d 1065 (N.Y. 1994) (noting that only when a statute allowing indemnification awards damages that serve a wholly punitive, and not compensatory, purpose are they precluded by New York policy).

Vicariously assessed punitive damages are not insurable in New York. See Zurich Ins. Co., 642 N.E.2d 1065.

This of course does not mean claims for punitive damages should never be asserted in NY, nor does it mean they are always uninsured.  It simply means practitioners should have their eyes wide open with respect to collections matters.

Thanks for reading!

Christina

_________________________________
Christina Bruner Sonsire, Esq.
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William Street
Elmira, New York 14902-1338
csonsire@zifflaw.com
Office: 607.733.8866
Toll-Free: 800.ZIFFLAW (943.3529)
Web: zifflaw.com
Blog: NYInjuryLawBlog.com


Record Upstate NY Settlement in Albany Medical Malpractice Case

Albany-Medical-Center-Hospital

Albany Medical Center Hospital

I wanted to offer my congratulations to attorney John Powers for a record settlement in a tragic medical malpractice case. John is an excellent Albany attorney with whom I have had the pleasure of working on several cases.

The Albany Times-Union carried the story, “$5.2 M benefit can’t heal loss.” John handled the case for the family of Diane Rizk McCabe. Diane died in 2007, at age 32. The Caesarean delivery of her second child was not handled correctly. Diane slowly bled to death over 15 hours. Albany Medical Center Hospital will pay the cash settlement for malpractice and mandated changes in procedure.

The McCabe family took a settlement, but John was able to bring this case to an unusual conclusion. The monetary settlement is substantial, but what this family truly wanted two things: To make Diane a remembered presence to her two children and to force the hospital to make changes that would prevent this kind of loss from happening to any other families.

John represented Joseph McCabe, Diane’s widowed husband and a Schenectady police officer. In the Times-Union story, John says he was ready to take the case to trial in August.

“It was never about the money with the family,” John was quoted as saying. “It came down to the non-monetary aspects involved with the settlement. They wanted to do something to make certain this doesn’t happen to someone else and to create a memorial to Diane for the children as they grow up that they’ll know that their mother is being remembered in this way.”

If the McCabe family had pursued the trail, they couldn’t have won those very important non-monetary stipulations. The Albany Medical Center Hospital must fund for the next 20 years a Diane McCabe Memorial Quality Lecture series focusing on topics related to enhancing patient safety.

The hospital must also buy a maternal and neonatal simulator for staff training and to change monitoring procedures for women during childbirth.

I just want to congratulate John for being able to bring such a tragic case to a resolution that really means something to the McCabe family. He’s also a past president of the New York State Academy of Trial Lawyers. The organization sent an e-mail to members with an announcement of this extraordinary settlement.

Thanks for reading,
Jim
_________________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
Personal Injury & Malpractice Attorney
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Tel. (607) 733-8866  Fax. (607) 732-6062
Toll Free 1-800-943-3529
mailto:jreed@zifflaw.com http://www.zifflaw.com

E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

NY & PA Malpractice Attorney Shares Surprising Truth about Tort Reform

Medical-malpracticeThe Elmira Star-Gazette recently published a letter written by my cousin Pat O’Donnell. Although I agree with my cousin on many matters, there are a few on which we differ. One subject on which our opinions vary is tort reform and the cost of health care in America. First, let me share my cousin’s letter, then I’ll explain why I feel I must dispute his argument.

From the Elmira Star-Gazette, Feb. 19, 2010:

“Most Americans agree we need health care reform. What we do not want is for the government to take over the industry. Start with tort reform. Doctors are paying six-figure checks for malpractice insurance a year, and these figures increase yearly, as do all our premiums. The reason Washington does not want to address this problem is most of them are lawyers (with friends who are lawyers) getting rich on malpractice law suits.

The second problem to tackle is the sale of insurance across state lines (you can buy insurance only from a company within your own state). Open up the lines – its called competition – which in turn make you sharpen your pencil when you quote your goods.

Next – jobs. Unemployment’s hovering around 10 percent; we tried to spend our way out time and time again, but it does not work. Cut taxes across the board. If we Americans have more, we spend more. Consumer spending creates jobs. It’s time we stand up to the corruption once and for all. Maybe its time we elected some people that actually live the life the people now in Washington so want to control.”

- Pat O’Donnell

To counter Mr. O’Donnell assertions, I can begin with the results of a comprehensive study published by University of Connecticut Law Professor Tom Baker.  He revealed that the cost of all malpractice claims in the United States – including legal fees, insurance costs, and payouts – amounts to less than one-half of 1 percent of all U.S. health care spending.

I’d also like to share this CNN clip of Senator Richard J. Durbin making a strong, compelling argument against the Republican push for malpractice reform:

Simply put, lawsuits are not to blame for our health care system’s deficiencies – they are simply political scapegoats.

Malpractice claims actually decrease spending by encouraging doctors to perform properly, avoiding costs associated with caring for people injured by their mistakes.

Moreover, tort reformists want to shift responsibility from private insurance companies to taxpayers.

According to the Institute of Medicine, 98,000 people die from malpractice each year.  Currently, victims are compensated by negligent doctors’ insurance companies.  By limiting doctors’ exposure to lawsuits, victims will have to look to public entities to cover future medical treatment, lost wages and physical and occupational rehabilitation.

Yes, that’s right– if you limit recoveries in lawsuits, the medical costs will be borne by YOU the taxpayer rather than the medical malpractice insurance carrier!

Although tort reform has the potential to save money – by allowing doctors to save negligible amounts of money in insurance premiums – it is much more likely to lead to increased costs for the rest of us.

As I mentioned, my cousin and I have many opinions in common, but this is a subject on which we diverge. I’m sure Mr. O’Connell will agree with me in an appreciation of a healthy debate!

Thank you,

Christina
________________________________
Christina Bruner Sonsire, Esq.
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William Street
Elmira, New York 14902-1338
csonsire@zifflaw.com
Office: 607.733.8866
Toll-Free: 800.ZIFFLAW (943.3529)
Web: zifflaw.com
Blog: NYInjuryLawBlog.com





NY Malpractice Lawyer Discusses Dangerous Drug Avandia Causing Heart Attacks; Why Drug Manufacturers Should Just Come Clean

AvandiaWhen will these drug manufacturers learn that it is NOT acceptable to keep distributing a drug they KNOW is causing injury and death?

Haven’t they learned anything from the asbestos cases, the Vioxx cases, the Levaquin cases? The bottom line is that they will NOT be able to conceal damaging information forever. In today’s age of free exchange of information, it is becoming more difficult than ever for any manufacturer to keep a lid on problems with their products. In the old days, a heart attack victim in Pennsylvania might know nothing about a heart attack victim in New York, but those days are over. Online communities of patients, doctors and medical researchers can now share their experience with people around the world with just a click of a button.

If this is so obvious to me, why isn’t it obvious to these drug manufacturers who mistakenly believe they can hide the damaging information from the public? Hmmmm, perhaps it is the lure of BIG DOLLARS. The longer you wait to recall a drug can mean millions if not billions of dollars of drug sales.

Heck, why not try to make as much money as possible on a drug before you pull the plug on it? It sure makes business sense but it totally forgets that you are injuring or killing innocent people in exchange for a few more $. Sadly, big business often cares more about profits than people.

A recommendation to manufacturers

Here’s what I would like to tell the companies who have learned that a product they thought was safe but has now been revealed as dangererous: IMMEDIATELY stop distribution of any suspected dangerous product BEFORE more people are permanently injured or killed. Toyota, are you listening?

It appears that Avandia is among the latest drugs to join the “dangerous drug concealed from the public” camp. Avandia, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, is a popular diabetes drug. Unfortunately, Avandia has a deadly side effect of drastically increasing the risk of heart attacks and causing liver damage.

A 2007 study in the highly respected New England Journal of Medicine revealed the increased heart attack risks associated with Avandia. CNN did a great video report on the dangers of Avandia and how those dangers were well known to GlaxoSmithKline long before they publicly revealed any information:

Avandia Linked to Heart Attacks – CNN “American Morning”

More details about Avandia:

Avandia (rosiglitazone maleate) is a GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) drug developed to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. First approved by the FDA in 1999, the agency reported 8 years later a significant increase in the risk of heart attack in those patients to whom Avandia had been prescribed. And many deaths have been linked to Avandia. More recently, two independent studies showed that bone fractures, particularly in female patients, have been associated with this popular diabetes drug, while a third study has found a link between Avandia and liver failure.

Safety concerns and side effects that have been associated with Avandia include the following:

  • hypersensitivity
  • cardiac failure
  • hepatic impairment
  • macular oedema
  • bone fracture

In addition to these serious side effects, several other risk factors associated with consuming Avandia include: weight gain, cold, cough, headache, inflammation of sinuses, back pain, swelling, fluid retention and cardiac arrest.

If you or a family member have used Avandia and have suffered heart attack or liver damage after taking Avandia, please consult with an experienced malpractice lawyer ASAP so you can learn about your legal options. If you do not know an experienced malpractice lawyer, you can feel free to e-mail me at jreed@zifflaw.com.

Thanks, Jim

_________________________________

James B. Reed
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and
NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Information Lawyers NEED to Know: Ziff Law to Host CLE Seminar on Liens, Set-Asides and Special-Needs Trusts

medicalThe Ziff Law Firm has planned an important seminar for legal professionals.

The firm will host Liens, Set-Asides and Special Needs Trusts, noon to 2 p.m. on Friday, March 5 at the Ziff offices, 303 William Street in Elmira.

The seminar will be presented by Brett Newman, managing partner of Lien Resolution Group, and Ziff Law’s Christina Bruner Sonsire, Esq.

Participants earn two CLE credits and lunch will be provided. The cost is free for members of the Academy of Trial Lawyers and $100 for non-members. The $100 admission fee can be applied toward the cost of a one-year membership in the Academy. For more information, follow this link to the Seminar Brochure and/or check the Academy of Trial Lawyers Brochure.

The seminar will cover a variety of topics:

  • Changes in state and federal laws affecting Medicare reimbursement claims
  • Medicaid liens
  • Private health insurance subrogation claims
  • When Medicare set-asides are appropriate in liability and workers compensation cases
  • Attorney and client liability for Medicare, Medicaid and ERISA claims
  • Procedures to identify potential liens, initiate correspondence with the lien holder, audit and petition bills and payment summaries, and negotiate procurement offset
  • The protection of client government benefits through special needs trusts

To register for the seminar, please visit the Academy of Trial Lawyers online or call the Academy at (518) 364-4044. Please contact me directly if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Christina
________________________________
Christina Bruner Sonsire, Esq.
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William Street
Elmira, New York 14902-1338
csonsire@zifflaw.com
Office: 607.733.8866
Toll-Free: 800.ZIFFLAW (943.3529)
Web: zifflaw.com
Blog: NYInjuryLawBlog.com


Court Decision Protects Plaintiffs By Making Defense Doctors Liable for Bad Advice

Court-ruling-on-DME-doctor-liabilityMost people take it as a given that doctors are accountable for accurate, competent care of EVERY person whom they see in a professional capacity. It’s difficult to believe, but until just recently, there was a big exception to that standard.

It was VERY difficult to successfully sue doctors who conducted medical exams for the defense in no-fault, worker’s compensation and personal injury cases. Typically retained by insurance companies or patients’ employers, these physicians were protected from lawsuits because they did not have a “duty of care” to the patients they saw. This duty wasn’t established because these doctors have a fleeting interaction with patients – seeing them once to collect information for the defense.

That has all changed, however, due to a recent decision by the New York Appellate Court – a decision I found out about via attorney Eric Turkewitz’s New York Personal Injury Law Blog. In the post, “NY Appellate Court Says OK to Sue No-Fault, Workers’ Comp and DME Physicians,” Eric explains this important change – a set of court-established criteria that make these “Doctors for the Defense” accountable for any bad advice or poor care they give the patients they see.

As Eric  explains it, the New York’s Appellate Division First Department said that these doctors, can be sued if certain conditions exist. A court panel  unanimously set these rules, based on the case Badalto v. Rosenberg:

“In the context of a physical examination conducted for the purpose of rendering an evaluation for a third party, such as an employer or insurer, an implied physician-patient relationship may arise if the physician either affirmatively treats the examinee or affirmatively advises the examinee as to a course of treatment.”

The three conditions set forth by the court are:

1. that the advice was incorrect,

2. that it was foreseeable that the plaintiff would rely on the advice, and

3. that the plaintiff detrimentally relied on the advice.

As an experienced personal injury attorney, Eric not only does a great job of explaining the qualifications demanded to make a case – but the consequences for personal injury law in general. This ruling gives a new protection to plaintiffs – and undermines the practice of quick, shallow medical exams for the defense.

To quote from Eric’s New York Personal Injury Blog posting on the subject:

“All those 5-10 minute quickie exams done by doctors on behalf of insurance companies may now subject those doctors to liability. If a doctor is going to cut off benefits, s/he will now have to write that the worker can go back to work, but also write that the worker shouldn’t actually rely on this opinion. The physicians will have to write, essentially, that their opinions are actually worthless and should not be relied upon. If an injured party shouldn’t rely on it, why should a judge or jury?”

Accountability. Standards. Informed opinions. Should anything less be expected of doctors – for any exam?

Thanks again to Eric Turkewitz for blogging about this and other important developments in personal injury law.

Sincerely,

Jim
_________________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
Personal Injury & Malpractice Attorney
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Tel. (607) 733-8866 Fax. (607) 732-6062
Toll Free 1-800-943-3529
mailto:jreed@zifflaw.com http://www.zifflaw.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.