ARTICLE ID 27646
$________ - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - EXCESSIVE RADIATION - RADIATION INJURIES - BURNS TO FEMORAL, SCIATIC AND PERONEAL NERVES - LOSS OF MOTION IN HIP AND KNEE - FOOT DROP TO ELDERLY PLAINTIFF.
Palm Beach County
The female plaintiff brought this medical malpractice action
against the defendant radiologist, his radiology group and the
independent corporation which provided radiation treatment. The
plaintiff alleged that the defendant radiologist negligently
ordered a dosage of ________ rads of radiation in one treatment,
causing permanent radiation injuries to the plaintiff. The
plaintiff contended that the defendant corporation was
vicariously liable for the radiologists negligence due to the
ultra hazardous nature of radiation use.
The female plaintiff underwent a total hip replacement at age 68.
Evidence indicated that she had an excellent surgical result and
was able to ride a bicycle, walk long distances, had no limp and
traveled overseas frequently. At age 73, the plaintiff was having
minor pain in the hip. The plaintiff alleged that her orthopedic
surgeon referred her to the defendant radiologist for a "Mayo
Protocol" of treatment of ________ rads in 10 units for the purposes
of hindering the growth of ectopic bone. The defendant
radiologist, employed by the defendant radiology group (an
independent contractor), ordered and supervised a dosage of ________ p 7 3
rads in one treatment. The treatments were administered by
employees of the corporate defendant which had leased out the
entire radiology department of a hospital, owned the radiation
equipment and employed all the staff including the technicians.
At the time of treatment, the plaintiff contended that she became
weak and dizzy, which the defendant radiologist told her was a
transient ischemic attack (TIA) and that a red imprint of the
radiation grid was visible on her skin. Upon examination six
weeks later, the defendant radiologist informed the plaintiff
that she had a slight reaction to the radiation treatment, that
the red imprint of the radiation grid would disappear with time
and that no treatment was necessary, according to the plaintiffs
The plaintiffs medical experts opined that excessive radiation
treatment was administered to the plaintiff and that the
symptomatology from the radiation burn progressively worsened to
the point that the plaintiff lost all motion in her hip and knee.
The plaintiffs experts also reported that the plaintiff
developed a foot drop caused by radiation burns to the femoral,
sciatic and peroneal nerves. The plaintiff became wheelchair
bound and claimed that she was no longer able to drive her
vehicle. She could walk for short distances with the assistance
of a walker and leg brace, but contended that she required
assistance to install or remove the brace.
After pre-suit screening, the defendant corporation denied
liability. The defendant radiologist/radiology group admitted
liability and demanded arbitration. Arbitration was refused by
the plaintiff and suit was filed. The defendant
radiologist/radiology admitted liability after the radiologists
deposition. The radiologist admitted at deposition of ordering the
________ rad treatment although he had never given a dosage of more
than ________ rads before in one treatment.
The case settled the week before trial for a total of $1 million.
The defendant radiologist/radiology group contributed $________ of
the settlement and the defendant corporation paid $________.