Incision To Remove Melanoma Was Too Large, Causing Injury
In December 2002, plaintiff Kimberley Miles, age and occupation not given, was diagnosed with a small melanoma on her thigh. Her dermatologist removed the lesion and was able to obtain more than half-centimeter margins. The pathology report showed that the lesion had minimally invaded the top layer of skin, but the margins were completely clear of any cancer cells. Based on these findings Miles’ dermatologist recommended routine appointments since her cure rate was 95 percent to 98 percent.
A few weeks later, Miles took the pathology report to seek a second opinion from Dr. Daniel Weingrad, a surgical oncologist. Weingrad told Miles that she still had cancer and that her dermatologist had not removed the entire cancer from her thigh.
Weingrad convinced Miles that she needed additional surgery to remove the cancer, which Weingrad performed with a larger incision around the wound site. She sustained damage to her saphenous nerve and mymphatic vessels.
Miles sued Weingrad, claiming that that he misread the pathology report and then he negligently performed the procedure. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that the incision was 2 inches wider than it needed to be, causing the doctor to cut her saphenous nerve.
Defense counsel argued that the larger incision was necessary to achieve a 99 percent cure rate.
Miles sustained permanent damage to her saphenous nerve and lymphatic vessels underneath Weingrad’s incision. She has difficulty walking. Her husband, Jody Haynes, claimed loss of companionship and loss of household services.
The plaintiffs were awarded a combined $1,516,104.
Jody Haynes
$25,000 Wrongful Death: Past Lost House Hold Services
$25,000 Wrongful Death: Past Loss Of Society Companionship
Kimberly Ann Miles
$16,104 Personal Injury: Past Medical Cost
$250,000 Personal Injury: Past Pain And Suffering
$1,200,000 Personal Injury: Future Pain And Suffering