. .

Search Results

$________ - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - LITHIUM TOXICITY - RENAL FAILURE - PERMANENT NEUROLOGICAL INJURY - PLAINTIFF RENDERED INCAPABLE OF CARING FOR HIMSELF.

Massachusetts (30689)

The plaintiff in this medical malpractice case was a 25-year-old severely retarded male who was under the care and supervision of the defendant mental health agency. When he became ill, the plaintiff was brought to the hospital where blood samples were collected by the defendant laboratory. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant treating physicians failed to follow up on the lab tests that were ordered, and that the plaintiff suffered renal failure and toxic encephalopathy due to lithium toxicity. The defendant maintained that the delay in obtaining the lab results did not contribute to the plaintiff’s injuries, nor did it affect the plaintiff’s outcome.

There were five defendants in this case, including the mental health agency, two treating physicians, the physicians’ group, and the laboratory.

The plaintiff alleged that his lab results suggested abnormal kidney function. The plaintiff further alleged that the defendant physician did not follow up on the lab tests that she ordered and that the lab and personnel in the physicians’ group failed to advise the physician of the lab results. The plaintiff suffered renal failure and toxic encephalopathy due to lithium toxicity and was hospitalized for two months. The plaintiff also suffered permanent neurological damage that left him in a wheelchair and rendered him incapable of caring for himself, which he was able to do prior to his illness.

The plaintiff planned to call several experts, including an economist, a life care planning specialist and six physicians (two emergency room physicians, two nephrologists, a neurologist and a general practitioner).

The plaintiff’s experts were prepared to testify that with proper treatment, the plaintiff would have avoided the kidney failure and the neurological damage that occurred.

The defendant claimed that the delay in obtaining the lab results did not affect the plaintiff’s outcome. The defendant planned to call experts who were prepared to testify that the delay did not contribute to the plaintiff’s injuries and that the plaintiff could not prove that his neurological damage was caused by lithium toxicity.

The case settled approximately five weeks before trial for the amount of $________, with $________ paid up front and $________ in the form of a structured settlement. A special needs trust was established, which allows the plaintiff’s SSI and health benefits to continue.