 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Even v. Bohle11/25/2002
Plaintiffs appeal from the district court's ruling denying their motion for new trial in the plaintiffs' action seeking damages for medical malpractice following the birth of Even and Davis's second child. AFFIRMED.
Chris Even, George Davis, and their children (collectively "plaintiffs") appeal from the district court's ruling denying their motion for new trial in the plaintiffs' action seeking damages for medical malpractice following the birth of Even and Davis's second child. They contend (1) the trial court erred in failing to grant a new trial because there was no informed consent by Even to a vaginal delivery of her child or to the use of forceps and Dr. Bohle committed a medical battery and medical negligence by using forceps, and (2) the trial court erred in allowing cross-examination of Even concerning the petition filed in this matter. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND FACTS.
Even and Davis are married. They have two children, Madison and Carolyn. Even gave birth to their first child, Madison, in 1994 by cesarean section. In her pregnancy with Carolyn, Even came under the care of Dr. Daniel Bohle in her thirtieth week of pregnancy. Dr. Bohle provided obstetrical care to Even through her delivery of Carolyn. After a cesarean birth, the mother must choose whether her next birth will be by cesarean section or vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC). Even chose VBAC.
While Even was in labor, Dr. Bohle checked her and noted that she was not progressing any further. Dr. Bohle catheterized her, emptied her bladder, and tried to manually rotate the baby. These efforts did not result in further descension of the baby. Dr. Bohle then proceeded to use forceps to aid in the delivery of Carolyn. After the forceps were removed, Even pushed the baby successfully, and Carolyn was delivered vaginally. She was born in perfect condition, without a mark or bruise. Even, however, suffered a fourth degree tear or laceration between her vagina and anus. The tear went all the way into the skin that lines the anus or anal mucosa. At the time of trial in this matter, she continued to suffer from urinary and bowel dysfunction, sexual dysfunction, and nerve and muscle damage, among other things, as a result of Carolyn's vaginal birth.
The plaintiffs filed suit against Dr. Bohle and Dubuque Obstetrics & Gynecology, L.L.P. (collectively "defendants"). Even sought recovery for personal injury and damages, and George and the children sought recovery on a loss of consortium claim. They asserted three bases for liability, as follows: negligence, lack of informed consent, and medical battery. Following trial, the jury returned its verdict, finding no fault on the part of Dr. Bohle.
The plaintiffs filed a motion for new trial, alleging the jury verdict finding no fault was not sustained by sufficient evidence and failed to effect substantial justice. They specifically alleged Even was entitled to a new trial for the following reasons: Even did not provide informed consent, particularly as to the use of forceps, her conditional consent to VBAC was withdrawn when she advised Dr. Bohle not to deliver by forceps or operative delivery, and Dr. Bohle committed medical negligence by violating the standards of care with respect to the use of forceps. The district court overruled the motion, determining that (1) there is sufficient evidence in the record from which a jury could have found no fault on the negligence claim, (2) there is evidence from which a reasonable jury could find there was no medical battery, (3) there is substantial evidence that what happened to Even was a remote consequence which, indirectly, related to the issue as to whether or not the information w
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|