 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Miller v. Paulson9/20/1994
PEGGY BRYANT, Judge.
Plaintiff-appellant, Mary Kay Miller, appeals from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas granting the motion of defendant-appellee, George W. Paulson, M.D., for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and conditionally granting his motion for a new trial.
During the spring of 1979, plaintiff began experiencing dizzy spells and difficulty in closing her right eye. On November 9, 1979, plaintiff consulted defendant, a neurologist, regarding her symptoms. Following a neurological examination and CAT scan, defendant tentatively diagnosed plaintiffs condition as Bell's palsy.
Defendant examined plaintiff again on January 11, 1980, but found nothing which caused him to change his diagnosis. Plaintiff's symptoms continued to worsen, and on February 13, 1980, defendant admitted plaintiff to Riverside Methodist Hospital for a series of tests. All test results were normal and defendant discharged plaintiff from the hospital on February 18, 1980, "somewhat uncertain as to what going on." (Letter from defendant to plaintiffs ophthalmologist, February 19, 1980.) Plaintiff's next appointment with defendant in April 1980 again failed to bring about any change in defendant's diagnosis or treatment of plaintiff.
Over the next year, plaintiff continued to experience intermittent dizzy spells, developed a twitch in the right corner of her mouth and lost all ability to close her right eye. On March 30, 1981, defendant again examined plaintiff. Following the examination, defendant wrote to plaintiff explaining that although her condition was "a bit more than a routine Bell's Palsy," he did not think that any further tests were indicated at that time.
In early November 1981, plaintiff had her final scheduled appointment with defendant. Following the appointment, defendant wrote to plaintiff as follows:
"* * * I see nothing to make me think of a tumor or MS but I do think you could have some scar tissue forming around the facial nerve and I wonder, if in fact, surgical exploration of this area might not be desirable eventually."
Defendant did not pursue exploratory surgery and never referred plaintiff to a surgeon.
Plaintiff was examined by Dr. William Hunt, a neurosurgeon, on April 13, 1983. Following the examination, Dr. Hunt wrote to defendant, stating that " he nature of onset and progression suggests a benign tumor."
On May 17, 1983, Dr. Mark May, a neurosurgeon practicing at the Eye and Ear Hospital of Pittsburgh, operated on plaintiff and removed a "tumor * * * from [plaintiff's] facial nerve." (Dr. May's postoperative report.) Dr. May, however, did not perform a nerve graft in an attempt to restore some function to plaintiff's right facial muscles; rather, following the surgery to remove the "tumor," Dr. May referred plaintiff to Dr Daniel Baker, a plastic surgeon , who performed a series of operations intended to alleviate some of the disfiguring effects of plaintiff's facial paralysis.
On May 11, 1990, plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against defendant in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, alleging that she had entered into a physician-patient relationship with defendant in 1979 which continued until May of 1983, that during the relationship defendant negligently had failed to diagnose the presence of a tumor on her seventh facial nerve, and that defendant's negligence had proximately caused her to suffer permanent paralysis of the right side of her face.
Beginning on April 5, 1993, a jury trial was held. On April 15, 1993, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $800,000; t
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|