 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Johnson v. Pratt6/9/2005
In early 2000, Barbara Johnson (together with her husband Paul Johnson, the "Johnsons," "Plaintiffs," or "Appellants") sought medical treatment at Spine Memphis, a division of The Orthopedic Clinic ("Spine Memphis") for chronic back pain and hip stiffness following an injury. At Spine Memphis, Ms. Johnson was seen by Dr. Edward Pratt (together with Spine Memphis, "Defendants," or "Appellees"). Dr. Pratt diagnosed lumbar spinal stenosis and recommended surgery to stabilize Ms. Johnson's lower spine. On June 26, 2000, Dr. Pratt performed surgery on Ms. Johnson in which he implanted pedicle screws on each side of two contiguous vertebrae in order to fuse them. Following the surgery, Ms. Johnson experienced renewed stiffness. On or about January 16, 2001, Ms. Johnson visited Dr. Roger Weiner, a cardiologist. Dr. Weiner ordered an EKG, which yielded "abnormal" results. Based upon these results, Ms. Johnson returned to Dr. Pratt for diagnosis and treatment on February 25, 2001. Dr. Pratt ordered x-rays, which revealed that one of the four implanted pedicle screws had shifted and that the screw was pressing against an abdominal artery. Dr. Pratt concluded that surgery was necessary to remove the errant screw and he performed that second surgery on March 12, 2001.
On February 25, 2002, the Johnsons filed a Complaint against Spine Memphis and Dr. Pratt alleging medical negligence. Specifically, the Complaint asserts that Dr. Pratt used seventeen pedicle screws rather than the "two screws explained by the defendant and consented to by the plaintiff," and that there was a lack of informed consent. On April 22, 2002, Spine Memphis and Dr. Pratt filed a joint Answer, in which they denied the material allegations of the Complaint. On May 21, 2002, the Johnsons filed "Plaintiffs' Answers to Defendants First Set of Interrogatories and First Request for Production of Documents." In response to Interrogatory No. 9, which asked the Johnsons to identify the names of any experts they expected to call, the Johnsons stated that "plaintiff has not yet determined whom she will call to testify at the trial of this matter. Once this determination is made, this interrogatory will be supplemented in accordance with the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure."
On May 28, 2002, Spine Memphis and Dr. Pratt filed a joint "Motion for Summary Judgment" along with a Memorandum of Law and the Affidavit of Dr. Pratt in support thereof. The Affidavit of Dr. Pratt reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
Comes now, Edward Pratt, M.D., who after having be duly sworn, states under oath as follows:
1. I, Edward Pratt, am a medical doctor and practice my specialty of orthopedic surgery in Memphis, Tennessee. I am licensed to practice medicine in Tennessee and was so licensed in 2000 and at least one year prior thereto. I am familiar with the recognized standard of professional practice required of physicians practicing in my specialty in this community.
2. On June 26, 2000, I operated on Barbara Johnson for instability of L4-5 with spinal stenosis. The operative procedure was decompression with laminectomy and fusion using bone graft and pedicle screws. This surgical procedure was indicated and was performed in a recognized manner in accordance with a recognized standard of care for orthopedic surgeons performing this procedure in this community.
3. Post-operatively, I continued to follow Barbara Johnson, and by the spring of 2001, it was apparent that the pedicle screws had given way and should be removed. The fact that the pedicle screws gave way is not an indication that the original operative procedure was done improperly, but rather because this is a recognized complication.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|