One of the key components of medical malpractice cases is the standard of care. Specifically, a plaintiff must establish that applies to the allegedly negligent health care provider and provide expert testimony explaining the manner in which the defendant breached the standard. In cases in which the parties produce conflicting evidence regarding what standard applies, the jury is free to accept either party’s assertion. As discussed in a recent opinion issued in a New York radiology malpractice case, the adoption of one expert’s opinion over the other may not constitute grounds for reversal. If you were harmed while undergoing diagnostic imaging, it is wise to speak to a skilled Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your rights.
The Plaintiff’s Harm
Allegedly, the plaintiff underwent a diagnostic imaging test at the defendant hospital. Prior to the test, an IV was placed in her hand, and during the test, CT contrast media was administered to her at a rate of 1.3 ccs pers second. The contrast media subsequently leaked from her veins into her surrounding tissues, causing her to suffer numerous complications, including compartment syndrome, which required a surgical repair.
It is reported that she subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant hospital and the defendant radiologist who administered the test. As to the defendant radiologist, she alleged that he deviated from the standard of care by administering the contrast media at a flow rate higher than 1.0 ccs per second. At trial, the parties submitted conflicting expert testimony regarding what was required under the applicable standard of care. The jury ultimately found in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.
Factors Considered in Evaluating Whether to Vacate a Verdict
On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the jury’s verdict should be set aside and judgment in her favor should be granted as a matter of law. The court was not persuaded by the plaintiff’s argument, stating that despite her contentions, there were permissible inferences and a valid line of reasoning from which rational individuals could determine that the defendants did not deviate from the accepted practice of medicine by administering the contrast media at the rate of 1.33 ccs.
Instead, the court explained, the plaintiff’s evidence that the hospital’s policy dictated that the contrast media be administered at a rate of 1.0 ccs was merely evidence of negligence for the jury to consider in evaluating whether the defendants violated the standard of care. Thus, the court denied her appeal.
Speak to a Proficient Syracuse Lawyer
A patient who suffers harm during a diagnostic procedure must prove that the injury arose from the negligence of the doctor performing the study to recover damages for radiology malpractice. If you suffered harm during an imaging procedure, it is advisable to speak to an attorney about your options. The Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys of DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers are proficient at helping people injured by negligent medical professionals in the pursuit of damages, and if you hire us, we will fight to help you seek a just outcome. You can reach us via our form online or by calling us at 833-200-2000 to schedule a conference.