 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bingman v. Ohio Dep't of Rehabilitation and Correction11/2/2005
DECISION
{ } Plaintiff brought this action against defendant alleging claims of medical malpractice and wrongful death. The issues of liability and damages were bifurcated and the case proceeded to trial on the issue of liability.
{ } At all times relevant to this action, the decedent, Charles Bingman, was an inmate in the custody and control of defendant pursuant to R.C. 5120.16. On October 18, 2001, Bingman arrived at the Corrections Reception Center (CRC) at Orient to begin his term of incarceration. He was 69 years old upon arrival. As part of the intake process at CRC, Bingman received a medical screening and examination that included blood tests, an EKG, and a chest x-ray. There is no dispute that Bingman's intake physical did not reveal any significant health concerns. On December 14, 2001, Bingman was transferred to Hocking Correctional Facility (HCF) after completing an offender program at Madison Correctional Institution.
{ } On December 17, 2001, Bingman was examined by Herbert Estis, M.D., the medical director at HCF. Dr. Estis testified that it was his practice to examine inmates soon after they had been transferred to HCF because most of the inmates at that institution were elderly and had chronic health conditions. For several months following his initial examination by Dr. Estis, Bingman occasionally returned to the infirmary with common complaints such as athlete's foot or a sinus infection. In May 2002, Dr. Estis prescribed an anti-inflammatory medication based upon Bingman's history of arthritis and his complaints of pain "off and on" in his left hip. In November 2002, Dr. Estis examined Bingman and determined that his complaints of pain in his back, legs, and hips were caused by back strain. When Bingman complained of pelvic pain later that month, Dr. Estis ordered a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test to screen for prostate cancer. The test revealed that Bingman's PSA level was 122 nanograms per deciliter (ng/dl), an extremely elevated reading. A subsequent biopsy confirmed that Bingman had a high-grade malignant tumor and a bone scan revealed that the disease was widely metastatic. After he was diagnosed with prostate cancer, Bingman spent the remainder of his incarceration at either the Corrections Medical Center or the Frazier Health Center. Bingman died from complications associated with prostate cancer on February 19, 2004.
{ } Plaintiff alleges that defendant's negligence in failing to timely diagnose and treat Bingman's prostate cancer proximately caused his death. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that both the applicable standard of care and defendant's policy required that PSA testing be offered to men over the age of 50 and that defendant was negligent in failing to require Bingman to undergo PSA testing during his intake examination.
{ } In order to prevail on a claim of medical malpractice or professional negligence, plaintiff must establish: 1) the standard of care recognized by the medical or nursing community; 2) the failure of defendant to meet the requisite standard of care; and 3) a direct causal connection between the negligent act and the injury sustained. Wheeler v. Wise (1999), 133 Ohio App.3d 564; Bruni v. Tatsumi (1976), 46 Ohio St.2d 127. The appropriate standard of care must be proven by expert testimony. Bruni, at 130. The expert testimony must explain what a medical professional of ordinary skill, care, and diligence in the same medical specialty would do in similar circumstances. Id. Similarly, in order to maintain a wrongful death action on a theory of negligence, plaintiff must establish three elements: 1) a duty owed to plaintiff's decedent; 2) a breach of that duty; and 3) proximate causation between
Page 1 2 3 4 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|