 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Walker v. Giles11/18/2005
>
COUNSEL: And it's finally discovered two days later on Sunday?
DR. EVANS: That she has a ruptured appendix with abscess, and she is sick as can be.
Dr. Williams reached the same expert conclusion based on her review of themedical records.
COUNSEL: Is it your opinion or do you have an opinion as to whether or not Kim Walker had early appendicitis on Wednesday?
DR. WILLIAMS: Yes, it is my opinion that she did.
In turn, Dr. Martin Tobin, admitted as an expert in pulmonary critical care , stated several times during his testimony that it was his opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that based on the signs and symptoms recorded in Walker's medical chart, Walker's appendix ruptured no earlier than 4:00 p. m. on Saturday, June 23, 2001.
COUNSEL: Certainly your opinion here today . . . is that her appendix did not rupture any time [before] 4 p. m., true?
DR. TOBIN: Correct.
COUNSEL: That this would be the absolute earliest, right?
DR. TOBIN: Correct.
Moreover, Dr. Williams and Dr. Evans both testified that in their professional opinions, if appellees had complied with the applicable standard of care, appendectomy surgery would have been performed on Walker on Thursday or Friday, and, therefore, in light of Dr. Tobin's expert testimony, prior to the rupture of Walker's appendix. Specifically, Dr. Williams and Dr. Evans testified that if Dr. Giles, Dr. Klein, or Dr. Gingrey had complied with the standard of care and timely ordered a follow-up blood study prior to Walker's initial discharge from the hospital on Friday morning, the blood study would have revealed a worsening abdominal bacterial infection, rather than a viral infection as previously diagnosed. Both experts further testified that having obtained the results of a follow-up blood study, appellees would have had a duty to consult with a general surgeon and ensure that an abdominal CT scan was performed in order to determine the exact type of abdominal bacterial infection suffered by Walker.
Finally, Dr. Evans testified that because of the high accuracy rate of abdominal CT scans, it was his professional opinion that such a scan clearly would have revealed Walker's acute appendicitis, leading to immediate emergency surgery on Thursday or Friday, rather than to her discharge on Friday morning.
COUNSEL: What would be the statistical - percentage wise, what would be the accuracy rate of a CT . . . ?
DR. EVANS: Ninety-six percent. Some studies might be as low as ninety-four percent. But the number is pretty high.
COUNSEL: In your opinion, had a CT been done on Thursday and/or Friday, would surgery have ensued . . . either Thursday or Friday?
DR. EVANS: Yes. Yes.
Based on this combined expert testimony, we conclude that appellants presented evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact over whether the rupture of Walker's appendix would have been prevented, if appellees had properly complied with the standard of care during Walker's first admission into the hospital. Appellees suggest in their appellate brief that appellants must establish that their alleged medical negligence affirmatively caused Walker's appendix to rupture prior to her initial discharge on Friday morning. Appellees misstate the standard applicable in medical misdiagnosis cases. Appellants were only required to come forward with some evidence showing that if appellees had abided by the standard of care, the rupture of her appendix would have been avoided. Anthony, 231 Ga. App. at 659 (1). See also Berrell, 260 Ga. App. at 896; Parrott v. Chatham Coun
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|