Anesthesia Malpractice Lawsuit Results in $2.25M Verdict
A California jury has awarded $2.25 million in a medical malpractice lawsuit filed against a medical center and an anesthesiologist who allegedly let the plaintiff go too deep under, resulting in a brain injury due to lack of oxygen.
The anesthesia brain injury lawsuit was filed by a California man who suffered an anoxic brain injury during a botched eye surgery at Mazzocco Ambulatory Surgical Center. The complaint, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, charged both the anesthesiologist and the center with negligence for not meeting medical standards of care.
The plaintiff went to the medical center to have the lens on one eye replaced with an artificial one. It is a standard procedure that takes about two hours, with surgery only taking a fraction of that time.
Did You Know?
Millions of Philips CPAP Machines Recalled
Philips DreamStation, CPAP and BiPAP machines sold in recent years may pose a risk of cancer, lung damage and other injuries.Learn More
According to the malpractice lawsuit, the anesthesiologist had a history of walking out of the operating room while patients were under the effects of anesthesia. In this case, the complaint alleges that the plaintiff had a reaction to the anesthesia and went into a deeper level of sedation than intended. The plaintiff’s attorneys argued that the anesthesiologist either left the room or left the plaintiff unattended, during which time the patient stopped breathing.
The lack of oxygen caused the plaintiff to suffer an anoxic brain injury, also known as cerebral hypoxia or hypoxic-anoxic injury. It is a serious, life-threatening injury that can cause permanent cognitive damage and can disable the victim.
The anesthesiologist settled with the plaintiff before the trial, according to a press release issued by the plaintiff’s medical malpractice lawyers. At trial, the jury found Mazzocco Ambulatory Surgical Center to be negligent, awarding $2.25 million in damages.
Get more articles like this sent directly to your inbox.
"*" indicates required fields
jacksonOctober 31, 2014 at 3:15 am
I got my mouth wired shut due to a broken jaw procedure. They applied anesthetics. I told a doctor that was responsible for my discharge that I was in an extreme amount of pain and that the anesthetic's hasn't worn off. He and a nurse began to yell at me as if I wanted free paid medication. They said I was discharged and to leave. A few days later I get a call from the surgeon and he says they ha[Show More]I got my mouth wired shut due to a broken jaw procedure. They applied anesthetics. I told a doctor that was responsible for my discharge that I was in an extreme amount of pain and that the anesthetic's hasn't worn off. He and a nurse began to yell at me as if I wanted free paid medication. They said I was discharged and to leave. A few days later I get a call from the surgeon and he says they have to do surgery. I told the surgeon about the numbness and he said it was nerve damage. He then called me and said I need to get a test before they schedule me in for a correction. When I went in for the test he brought out a waiver to release all responsibilities for damages caused by anesthesia. I told him i'd like to consult with an attorney and he said that I can't. Then I told him I will not sign it and then he said to wait here. I told him I was going to leave and he said I cant leave until I signed and he trapped me in a room. After a total of 4 hours I left without signing. It's been about 2 weeks without any sign of healing. I think they're trying to commit fraud and protect themselves.
More Top Stories
Four federal judges have ruled that the second group of Camp Lejeune lawsuits to be prepared for bellwether trials will involve claims of prostate cancer, kidney disease, lung cancer, liver cancer and breast cancer.
A federal judge has scheduled the initial status conference for coordinated GLP-1 RA drug stomach paralysis lawsuit pretrial proceedings for March 14.
U.S. government attorneys now say they want each plaintiff in a Camp Lejeune lawsuit to prove specific causation, which seems to run counter to the intent of the law passed by Congress.