Birth Injury Lawyer Blog 24/7

Published on: June 29, 2024

Court debates medical negligence versus plaintiff’s compliance. Audette v. Toussaint-Milford, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 30823 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2019)

by Stephen Bilkis

In the medical malpractice case of Audette v. Toussaint-Milford, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 30823 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2019), the issue of the patient’s role in contributing to their medical condition. The plaintiff file a lawsuit against the medical staff that were involved in her care and the delivery of her baby. Her delivery was complicated. However, the plaintiff was uncooperative and chose to leave the hospital early, against medical advice.

Leaving a hospital against medical advice (AMA) occurs when a patient chooses to discharge themselves from a healthcare facility despite recommendations from medical professionals to stay for further treatment. This decision is typically documented in the patient’s medical record, noting that the patient has been informed of the potential health risks and consequences of leaving prematurely. The reasons for leaving AMA can vary, including personal obligations, financial concerns, dissatisfaction with care, or mistrust of medical staff. However, this action can lead to worsened health outcomes, complications, or incomplete treatment, and may affect the patient’s ability to claim damages in cases of subsequent medical issues. If a medical malpractice claim is filed, leaving AMA complicates the case, as it must be determined whether the worsening condition is due to the original medical issue, the alleged malpractice, or the patient’s decision to leave.

Background Facts

Published on: June 29, 2024

Infant falls from hospital bed, sustaining severe injuries. T.V. v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp., 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 30084 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016)

by Stephen Bilkis

T.V. v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp., 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 30084 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016) is a medical malpractice and negligence case involving an infant who fell from a hospital bed, leading to serious injuries. In addition to the medical malpractice and negligence claims, the case also addresses New York’s stringent procedural requirements for medical malpractice claims against city-operated hospitals.

Under New York’s General Municipal Law § 50-e, individuals must file a notice of claim within 90 days of an incident if they intend to sue a municipal entity or employee for damages due to negligence or wrongdoing. This notice is a prerequisite for filing a lawsuit and must detail the incident, the injuries suffered, and the claimed damages. It serves to inform the municipality of potential liability and allows it to investigate the claims promptly. If the notice is not filed within the statutory period, claimants must seek judicial permission to serve a late notice, demonstrating a reasonable excuse for the delay and lack of substantial prejudice to the municipality.

Background Facts

Published on: June 29, 2024

Case questions medical practice involving choice of suture material. Ducasse v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp. 2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 1647 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Ducasse v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp., the plaintiff challenged the type of sutures used in her episiotomy. An episiotomy is a surgical incision made in the perineum—the area between the vagina and the anus—to enlarge the vaginal opening during childbirth. This procedure is typically performed to facilitate delivery, especially in cases where the baby needs to be delivered quickly or when there is a risk of severe tearing. The goal of an episiotomy is to prevent irregular, more traumatic tearing of the tissues that might occur during childbirth and to speed the delivery process when necessary.

Background Facts

On November 13, 2011, Atato Ducasse was in labor at Lincoln Hospital. The delivery encountered complications when the baby’s shoulders became stuck after the head had been delivered. Dr. Patrina Phillip, the attending physician, performed an emergency episiotomy to facilitate the birth. While the baby was delivered safely, during this procedure, Ducasse suffered a fourth-degree perineal laceration, leading to significant bleeding. To repair the damage, Dr. Phillip used two types of sutures—vicryl for the rectal mucosa and chromic for the internal and external anal sphincter. Despite the initial success of the procedure, complications followed.

Published on: June 29, 2024

Court determined negligence claim plausible given postpartum cancer diagnosis. Pezulich v. Grecco, 2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 3912 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Pezulich v. Grecco, the plaintiff challenged the decision of the Supreme Court, which had favored Richmond University Medical Center (RUMC) by granting summary judgment. The litigation centers around serious allegations of medical oversight following the care of a pregnant woman who tragically developed cervical cancer post-delivery and died.

Background Facts

On January 10, 2015, the decedent delivered her baby at Richmond University Medical Center (RUMC), under the care of her private physician, Dr. Michael A. Grecco. During a prenatal check-up on January 6, 2015, Dr. Grecco observed a cervical myoma measuring four to five centimeters, planning a vaginal delivery with subsequent myoma removal post-delivery. However, the myoma obstructed the baby’s descent during labor, necessitating a cesarean section performed with RUMC residents and an anesthesiologist present. The decedent’s husband noted that Dr. Grecco initially described the myoma as grape-sized, but during delivery, it had grown to the size of a grapefruit.

Published on: June 29, 2024

Court finds issues with fetal monitoring prior to stillbirth. Harwood v. Halfon, 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 30187 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Harwood v. Halfon, 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 30187 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023), the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice case The New York Presbyterian Hospital and two of its doctors related to the care provided during a pregnancy that tragically ended in a stillbirth. The plaintiff asserted that negligent actions and decisions by the medical staff led directly to the loss of their baby.

Background Facts

Annette Harwood, a 31-year-old who had previously suffered a miscarriage, began prenatal care under Dr. Perera in January 2019. Her pregnancy was closely monitored through several sonograms showing normal fetal development. On July 30, 2019, a sonogram revealed a breech presentation. On August 5, Dr. Perera attempted an external cephalic version (ECV) to correct the fetus’s position, which was unsuccessful.

Published on: June 28, 2024

Erb’s Palsy claim against doctors moves forward in court. N.R. v. Northwell Health, Inc. 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 50123 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023)

by Stephen Bilkis

In a complex legal battle involving North Shore University Hospital and associated medical professionals, a family sought justice for alleged medical malpractice during childbirth in 2016. The lawsuit accused the healthcare providers of negligence that reportedly led to severe birth injuries, including Erb’s Palsy.

Erb’s palsy is a form of brachial plexus palsy that occurs when the nerves in a baby’s upper arm are injured. It often happens during difficult childbirths or deliveries involving excessive pulling on the shoulders during a head-first delivery, or pressure on the baby’s raised arms during a breech delivery. In New York, as in many places, Erb’s palsy remains one of the most common birth injuries. This condition can result in weakness or loss of motion in the affected arm, and while some babies recover over months with physical therapy, others may require surgery to regain full function.

Background Facts

Published on: June 27, 2024

Emergency cesarean performed due to complications including fetal tachycardia. Robinson v. Northwell Health, Inc. 2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 33146 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021)

by Stephen Bilkis

In New York, medical malpractice cases are subject to a specific statute of limitations, which dictates the timeframe within which a lawsuit must be filed. For most medical malpractice cases, this period is two and a half years from the date of the alleged malpractice or from the end of continuous treatment rendered by the party being sued. This statute is critical as it aims to ensure timely resolution and fairness in litigation. However, certain conditions, such as foreign objects left in a patient’s body, continuous care of the patient, or cases involving minors, may modify this period, allowing for extensions under specific circumstances.

In Robinson v. Northwell Health, Inc. 2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 33146 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021), a medical malpractice case related to alleged mistakes made during the delivery of the plaintiff’s baby. The court examined not only issues related to the care that the doctors provided the plaintiff, but also the issue of the statute of limitations.

Background Facts

Published on: June 27, 2024

Adhesions from prior C-sections lead to severe bladder injuries. Dray v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp., 2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 32994 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)

by Stephen Bilkis

In a contentious medical malpractice and negligence case involving Rinat Dray against Dr. Leonid Gorelik, Metropolitan Ob-Gyn Associates, Dr. James C. Ducey, and Staten Island University Hospital (SIUH), the court faced motions and a cross-motion addressing the appropriateness of a repeat cesarean section (C-section) performed on Dray.

A woman who has undergone two previous Cesarean sections often develops adhesions where scar tissue forms between the bladder and the uterus. These adhesions can vary in density and extent, posing significant risks in subsequent surgeries, particularly another C-section. In such cases, the adhesions increase the likelihood of bladder injuries because the scarred tissues can complicate the separation of the bladder from the uterus during surgery. This necessitates meticulous surgical techniques and thorough preoperative assessments to identify and manage the adhesions effectively, minimizing the risk of damaging the bladder during the surgical procedure.

Background Facts

Published on: June 27, 2024

Malpractice case focuses on mismanaged high-risk pregnancy. In re Brea E. 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 50662 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2019)

by Stephen Bilkis

Losing a newborn baby is an unimaginably devastating experience for any parent. It brings profound grief and a sense of loss that can impact emotional well-being and disrupt the natural process of bonding and joy anticipated with the arrival of a child, often leaving lasting psychological scars. In re Brea E. 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 50662 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2019) is a medical malpractice case involving the tragic death of a newborn only three days after birth, the complexities of managing a high-risk pregnancy come to the forefront.

A pregnancy is considered high-risk when potential complications could affect the mother, the baby, or both. Factors that contribute to a high-risk pregnancy include advanced maternal age (typically over 35), pre-existing health conditions like hypertension, diabetes, or autoimmune disorders, and pregnancy-specific conditions such as preeclampsia or gestational diabetes. Additionally, obesity, a history of pregnancy losses, multiple pregnancies (such as twins or triplets), and problems in previous pregnancies like preterm labor can also elevate risk. These factors necessitate closer monitoring and management to ensure the health and safety of both mother and child throughout the pregnancy and delivery. If a healthcare provide fails to follow protocols and accepted medical practice in managing a high-risk pregnancy and as a result the baby or the mother suffers a serious injury, the healthcare provider may be liable.

Background Facts

Published on: June 27, 2024

Lawsuit concerning Erb’s palsy and episiotomy complications during labor. J. G. v. Michael Ihemaguba, M.D. 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 30899 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016)

by Stephen Bilkis

The case centers around the medical decisions made by doctors at St. Barnabas Hospital and their associated OB/GYN practice and shoulder dystocia. Shoulder dystocia is a birth complication where the baby’s shoulders get stuck inside the mother’s pelvis after the head has been delivered. This can occur during vaginal birth and requires immediate medical intervention to prevent injury to both the mother and the baby. The condition poses risks such as damage to the baby’s brachial plexus nerves, which can lead to a condition known as Erb’s palsy, characterized by weakness or paralysis of the arm. Managing shoulder dystocia often involves specific maneuvers by the delivering practitioner to safely release the baby’s shoulders and complete the birth.

Background Facts

On July 2, 2011, the plaintiff, a 35-year-old woman who was 38 weeks pregnant and had a history of giving birth to large babies, presented to St. Barnabas Hospital (SBH) following a spontaneous rupture of membranes. She had previously delivered three children weighing between 8 lbs 8 oz and 12 lbs 8 oz. Due to her history and current pregnancy conditions, she was considered at a potentially higher risk for complications during delivery. During the early hours of July 3, 2011, Dr. Michael Ihemaguba, the on-call obstetrician at SBH, assessed the plaintiff. After conducting a series of evaluations, including maneuvers to estimate the baby’s size and position and a standard Shoulder Dystocia Assessment, Dr. Ihemaguba concluded that the plaintiff did not exhibit any of the four risk factors typically associated with shoulder dystocia, a condition where the baby’s shoulders become lodged inside the mother’s pelvis, hindering delivery. At the end of his shift at 8:00 a.m., Dr. Ihemaguba transferred care to Dr. Rodney Capiro, providing him with all pertinent information about the patient’s condition and the assessments conducted. This handover was critical in the continuity of care and the subsequent medical decisions made during the delivery process. The baby suffered multiple injuries at birth, including a shoulder dystocia that resulted in a permanent brachial plexus injury known as Erb’s palsy.