|
|
 Client Testimonials
"I was very impressed with the caliber of professionals provided by Medical Analysis Resources[MAR]. Both times, I requested resources for regulatory due diligence transaction support, MAR provided knowledgeable professionals with experience in the areas under review. The professionals were experienced consultants that provided depth to the teams as well as the ability to work under a tight deadline. Both projects required extensive travel and time commitment. One project resulted in a reduction in purchase price of $15 million. MAR gave me a cost effective solution to exceed client expectations."
 CB, Manager, Big 4, Healthcare Consulting
"Rose Clifford's assistance was invaluable,"....
Read full article below:
The Medical-Legal News
Written by Hon. J. Robert Stansbury, London, Kentucky
On December 18, 2006, a Fayette Circuit Court jury in Lexington, Ky., following a two day trial, awarded the plaintiff, Helen Hammons $1,500.000 for pain and suffering, along with her medical bills of $48,164.91 and her loss of wages of $1,125.60. Her husband, Ray Hammons, was awarded $200,000.00 for loss of consortium.
Helen Hammons, a 67-year-old school bus monitor, had a total Abdominal Hysterectomy on June 7, 2004. (She had planned her surgery so that she would have the summer to recuperate and return to her job by the beginning of the fall school year in August.) She was discharged three days later. One month after being discharged from the Hospital, she began to experience abdominal cramping and rectal bleeding. She returned for follow-up consultation with her surgeon on July 22, 2004, and Sept. 13, 2004, but the cause of her symptoms was not determined. She was referred to a gastroenterologist and was scheduled for a CAT scan.
The CAT scan revealed that a laparotomy pad had been left inside her body. A subsequent colonoscopy revealed that the lap sponge had become attached to a section of her small intestines and to a section of her colon, causing numerous perforations.
The lap sponge was removed on Oct. 14, 2004, along with 18 inches of perforated small bowel and five inches of colon. Post op, Mrs. Hammons had continued to experience frequent explosive bowel movements that were initially eight to 10 per day and are currently five to six per day. She requires B-12 shots as the section of small intestines removed effects her nutritional vitamin intake.
The hospital admitted liability and acknowledged that the operating room technicians and circulation nurses were responsible for jointly conducting the sponge count and erred in this respect. (There were three separate counts involving at least two persons at each count).
The hospital filed a $250,000 Offer of Judgment that the plaintiffs refused to accept. Fayette Circuit juries had long been regarded by experienced courtroom observers and the legal community to be conservative in awarding damages in medical negligence cases.
J. Robert Stansbury from London, Ky., advised that he retained Medical Analysis Resources, Inc. He has worked with Rose Clifford, RN, a legal nurse consultant, on several medical negligence cases over the years.
"Rose Clifford's assistance was invaluable," according to Stansbury. "I needed a medical expert to assist in showing the jury the permanent consequences that explained the frequent and explosive bowel movements that Hammons continued to experience long after the surgery."
This medical expert not only assisted in proving the plaintiff's, Helen Hammon's, injures but the testimony was instrumental in countering the testimony of the defense medical expert, a gastroenterologist, who was called to testify. "The medical expert whom Rose Clifford directed us to was indispensable to our medical proof. His fee was very reasonable."
Stansbury related, "This was a jury that took detailed notes throughout the testimony." The attorneys for both sides had the opportunity to talk to numerous jurors after the trial pursuant to a court order granting permission. This enabled both sides to clearly understand the damage evaluation process. It was apparent that the medical evidence was crucial in so far as the jury understood the mechanism of permanent damage and was guided regarding the medical prognosis.
The Judgment was fully Paid and Satisfied on Feb. 22, 2007.
Article reprinted with permission from The Medical-Legal News. www.medical-legalnews.com
|
|
|
|
