$________ Legal malpractice - Failure to name family physician who misdiagnosed pseudo-aneurysm in leg after cardiac catheterization as a defendant - Continued bleeding into area of muscle - Peripheral neuropathy suffered by plaintiff diabetic.

Union County

This was a legal malpractice action involving the male plaintiff in his late 50s who contended that the defendant attorneys negligently failed to name the plaintiff’s family physician, who allegedly misdiagnosed complications following the performance of a cardiac catheterization, as a defendant. In the underlying case, an interventional cardiologist, who was not located near the plaintiff’s home, had performed the planned catheterization because he was referred to the plaintiff by the plaintiff’s union.

The plaintiff developed a pulsating mass slightly below the insertion point in the groin a few days after the procedure and it progressed downward. The plaintiff visited his family p 7 3 physician, who was nearby. The plaintiff contended, in the underlying case, that the family physician negligently failed to recognize that the plaintiff had suffered a complication of the catheterization known as a pseudo-aneurysm which permitted blood to accumulate in the muscle sheath near the insertion site. The plaintiff contended that the family physician advised him to use hot compresses, which was contraindicated.

The plaintiff maintained in the legal malpractice action that when the defendant attorney obtained the family physician’s records and forwarded them to the medical expert, the expert could not read them. The plaintiff contended that the defendant attorney failed to order a transcription as provided for by code.

The plaintiff asserted that the defendant attorney negligently failed to name the family physician and brought suit against the cardiologist only. The plaintiff maintained that during discovery and after the Statute of Limitations had run, it became apparent that the plaintiff has initially suffered a recognized complication of the catheterization and that the cardiologist was not negligent. The plaintiff contended that the medical negligence resulted in the development of peripheral neuropathy.

The defendant attorney denied that he was told by the medical expert that he needed to order a transcript of the records. The plaintiff countered that the original medical expert had submitted a written request for such transcript. The defendant also maintained that the peripheral neuropathy was caused by the plaintiff’s diabetes and not the alleged negligence of the physician. The plaintiff countered that an EMG showed that the location of the nerve injury was the same area where the pseudo- aneurysm occurred. The plaintiff contended that a diabetic related peripheral neuropathy would tend to be more diffuse and bilateral. The plaintiff who has retired on his UAW pension and made no wage claims. The evidence disclosed that the plaintiff has been able to remain reasonably active and travel with his wife.

The case settled prior to $________.