South Florida Personal Injury Lawyers

A Miami-Dade jury has awarded a woman $16 million in a medical malpractice case alleging complications from an unnecessary operation left her brain damaged.Lourdes Landis, 48, of Miami, suffered a seizure in 2001 after she was discharged from the hospital following brain surgery to remove a benign tumor. She lapsed into a coma and suffered brain damage because of a lack of oxygen.

Her attorneys argued in court that the surgery was unnecessary and that University of Miami neurosurgeon Jacques J. Morcos mishandled the operation. But Morcos said the tumor could have been deadly.

“I was the third opinion on this and we were all saying the same thing,” Morcos said. “This tumor was blocking the fluid spaces of her brain, causing a threat to her life - not immediately, but eventually. There was some bleeding, but it was properly managed with medication. She was discharged in the expected postoperative state. The tragedy in this case is that Fire Rescue was unable to secure her airway.”

University officials said they will appeal.

“Morcos did nothing wrong,” said Pascal Goldschmidt, dean of the Miller School of Medicine.

Two months before her discharge in August 2001, plaintiff’s decedent Vena Johnson, 70s, a resident at Life Care Centers of America, developed multiple pressure sores on her left foot which became infected and resulted in an amputation of her left leg. Johnson died about two months after her discharge from the nursing facility.On behalf of Johnson’s estate, Evelle Styles, her stepdaughter, sued Life Care Centers of America for negligent treatment, claiming Chapter 400 statutory violations of the resident’s rights and seeking wrongful death damages.Johnson had been a resident at the facility from April 2000 through August 2001. In the two-month period, the sores on her left foot worsened and became infected. The plaintiff claimed that Johnson did not receive adequate and appropriate nutrition and fluids and on two occasions developed fecal impactions, resulting in a five-day hospitalization for treatment.

After Johnson was discharged from the facility on Aug. 7, she was taken to the hospital for aggressive treatment of her wounds and underwent an amputation of the left leg about a month later. She went to a different nursing home after that and ultimately died in October 2001.

Plaintiff’s counsel contended that her treatment at the nursing home resulted in her death.

At trial, several Life Care Centers of America employees were called on by plaintiff’s counsel to testify that the nursing home was understaffed.

Defense counsel denied all the claims.

Defense counsel noted that her death certificate indicated she died of aspiration pneumonia. She was on a feeding tube before she ever came to the nursing home.

Plaintiff’s counsel sought damages for Johnson’s pain and suffering, affected her ability to enjoy life and caused her eventual death. Counsel also sought punitive damages. The jury rendered a defense verdict on all claims. Defense counsel’s motion for a directed verdict on the punitive damages claim was granted.

The jury found in favor of the defense.

For more than one year, drug manufacturer Eli Lilly and Co. played down the blood-sugar risks of its best-selling schizophrenia drug Zyprexa, failing to reveal important clinical trial results, according to internal company documents.

A 2000 confidential memo distributed to the top scientists at Lilly, show that patients taking Zyprexa had more than three times the risk of experiencing high blood sugar levels than those using a placebo. This is one of hundreds of internal documents that reveal the increased risks of adverse side effects associated with Zyprexa.

Zyprexa Diabetes Risk

However, the real findings of the drug company’s clinical trials weren’t revealed to the public until years later. Instead doctors and patients worldwide were led to believe that Zyprexa use only slightly increased the risk of high blood sugar in comparison to a placebo.

Another Lilly memo from 1999 shows that the drug maker found—after evaluating 70 clinical studies—that 16 percent of participants using Zyprexa for one year or more gained an average 66 pounds. But Lilly chose to gather their information from a small group of trials that found 30 percent of participants gained only about 22 pounds.

High blood sugar and weight gain are significant risk factors for developing diabetes. While Lilly claims there is no direct link between its schizophrenia drug and the condition, in 2004, the American Diabetes Association found that Zyprexa raised the risk of diabetes more than any other similar drugs.

In 2000, Lilly decided to reanalyze their data, but this announcement came after doctors and drug regulatory agencies had begun to question the risks associated with Zyprexa.

“In 1999, we already were thinking this drug causes weight gain—that’s clear—and there could be a lot of other metabolic consequences of that,” said Harvard psychiatry professor Dr. David N. Osser. “The weight gain itself is a known risk factor for diabetes.”

Zyprexa was prescribed to nearly two million people worldwide in 2005 alone.

A jury has awarded a Lancaster woman nearly $8 million after she lost the use of her only kidney when a local drugstore gave her five times the amount of medication she was supposed to take.Following a two-week trial in the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas, a judge on Dec. 8 ordered Rhode Island-based Eckerd Corporation to pay Tiffany Phillips $7.7 million for its role in the medicine mix-up.

Co-defendant CVS, also based in Rhode Island, reached a confidential settlement with Phillips for an undisclosed amount as the jury deliberated, said CVS spokesman Mike DeAngelis.

In 2002, Tiffany Phillips, now 28, went to Eckerd in Lancaster to get a prescription for an anti-rejection drug for her kidney transplant, said her attorney, Ronnie Crosby. Phillips had the transplant to replace the one kidney she was born with.

Eckerd didn’t have enough of the steroid, prednisone, so a technician called a Lancaster CVS store to fill the prescription, according to the suit. But a miscommunication between the two stores resulted in Phillips being told to take 1250 milligrams a day of the drug for three days rather than 250 milligrams, the lawsuit said.

Crosby said the CVS computer system flagged the prescription but a worker filled it using a manual override. Phillip was soon hospitalized and again needing a new kidney, Crosby said.

Crosby said the mistake left Phillips with few alternatives.

The transplant to replace the damaged kidney with her mother’s kidney failed. The next transplant succeeded, using a kidney from an organ donor, but Crosby said it wasn’t as good as the first transplant.

“The initial transplant was a perfect match,” Crosby said.

After taking too much of the steroid, Phillips is unable to use dialysis. Plus, she cannot have a third kidney transplant, Crosby said.

“This is it for her,” he said. “The net result is this has reduced her life expectancy.”

DeAngelis said no CVS employee had been disciplined because of the incident.

Eckerd had no comment when contacted Wednesday, but during the trial the company said Phillips, who has taken medication much of her life, should have known the amount given to her was wrong.

Eckerd, which has asked the judge to put the judgment aside, argued during the trial that Phillips was to blame for the problem.

“Any injuries or damages allegedly sustained by Plaintiff were due to and caused and occasioned by Plaintiff’s own negligence, gross negligence, recklessness, and wantonness,” Eckerd wrote a court filing.

The jury, however found the drug stores 90 percent at fault and ordered a $2.7 award for damages plus $5 million in punitive damages.

The jury originally awarded Phillips $6.35 million from CVS, but the company settled with her for a “heck of a lot less” during the deliberations, Crosby said.

The jury awarded punitive damages, Crosby said, because Eckerd never admitted it had done something wrong.

The jury found Phillips 10 percent at fault for not noticing the correct prescription on her hospital discharge papers.

A judge in a Texas widow’s lawsuit over the Merck & Co. drug Vioxx on Thursday reduced a $32 million jury award to about $7.75 million so that it conformed to state law.

A state jury in April found Merck & Co. liable for the death in 2001 of Leonel Garza, a 71-year-old man who had a fatal heart attack within a month of taking the since-withdrawn painkiller.

After the verdict was issued, the company was ordered to pay the Garza family $7 million in noneconomic compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages.

But Judge Alex Gabert, in a Rio Grande City courtroom, ordered the punitive damage reduced to conform to a 2003 Texas law that caps punitive damages at twice the amount of economic damages - lost pay - and up to $750,000 on top of noneconomic damages.

Because Garza was retired, the jury awarded no economic damages, so Merck was ordered to pay the most the family could receive under state law.

Merck argued during the trial that Garza had a 23-year history of heart disease beginning with a quadruple bypass in 1989 and had taken Vioxx only 17 days.

But Garza’s attorneys said Garza had just been told his veins had been cleared and that a stress test showed less than a 2 percent risk of heart attack within a year.

They touted the verdict as the first case in the country where a jury found short-term usage of Vioxx to be causative in heart attacks.

Tilden Katz, a spokesman for Merck’s outside legal counsel, said the company was seeking a new trial based on “the undisclosed financial relationship” between the plaintiff and one of the jurors.

Plaintiff attorney Luis Cardenas said the plaintiffs were pleased with the judge’s decision and called Merck’s planned motion for retrial “pretty standard.”

Merck attorneys in September were granted access to bank and cell phone records they said would show an improper financial relationship between juror Jose Manuel Rios and Felicia Garza, the widow.

Rios, who earns $22,000 a year as a school janitor, testified in a post-trial deposition to borrowing up to $10,000 interest-free from Felicia Garza. He said the loans included $2,500 that was paid off just weeks before jury selection in the case.

Merck lawyers requested the deposition in June after a fellow school employee alerted the local attorney in the case to the loans.

Of the thousands of cases filed against Merck, this was the sixth to reach a verdict.

The case’s venue gave it added distinction. Rio Grande City is within a few miles of the Mexican border and is county seat of one of the poorest counties in the nation. The region is known for plaintiff-friendly juries and large judgments.

Merck shares fell 3 cents to $43.27 in Thursday trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

General Motors has announced the opening of a new and improved crash test facility, which will offer simulated rollover tests to help enhance consumer safety. Every year in the United States, 10,800 people are killed in rollover crashes and over 16,000 people are seriously injured.

The automakers announcement indicates that the industry recognizes the need for safer vehicle designs that would protect people in the event of rollover crashes, as well as reinforces the need for a federal change that would require all auto companies to diligently perform crash tests.

For years, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has pushed dynamic or real-world crash tests to increase safety. However, auto manufacturers, including GM, have been opposed to the regulations—until now.

GM will not only conduct rollover crash tests imitating accidents experienced by highway drivers, but they will also test new rollover-enabled side airbags they plan on installing in their vehicles.

Sadly, there are currently no standards for seatbelt performance or the strength of roofs for rollover crashes. Until these important safety issues are addressed, the risk of serious injury or death on freeways remains high.

Recently Prime Minister John Howard formally announced a $225 million package to help elderly sufferers of osteoporosis at a nursing home.