Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

Can hospitals be held liable for medical malpractice?

Published on: March 15, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When you think about the concept of medical malpractice, you may think about a doctor failing to perform to the standards established in his or her area of practice. You may also think about surgeons failing to remove surgical devices after a procedure or doctors misdiagnosing a patient who ends up having a terminal disease. Despite these maladies attributable to individuals, a hospital could be held liable for malpractice as well.

This post will give a general explanation as to why.

To put hospital malpractice into proper context, consider this: when an automaker produces a vehicle that has particular defects that go unaddressed, the automaker could be held liable because it has a responsibility to ensure that its product is free from defects that could harm an unsuspecting consumer. Likewise, a hospital has a duty to ensure that the services it provides is not hindered by problems or inefficiencies that could result in a patient being harmed.

Can you sue after being injured by a pothole?

Published on: March 13, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The warmer and longer days are a telltale sign of spring. For many people in our region, it is a welcome sight after such a challenging winter. Unfortunately, one of the rites of spring in central New York is dealing with the potholes that have developed during the winter.

Potholes commonly form when ice and snow melt and seep through the cracks in the asphalt that are caused by wear and tear. The moisture may re-freeze as temperatures get colder, and when the weather warms up, the road tends to give way when the ice underneath melts. Indeed, potholes can be a nuisance and provide an unexpected jolt. Also, they can lead to injuries.

But when potholes become dangerous, who can be held accountable? This post will explore this question.

The notice requirement in premises liability cases

Published on: March 12, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

If you have slipped and fallen in a grocery store, or were injured by loose floor tiles in a mall or were assaulted while on hotel property, it is okay to feel as if you want your rights respected and to be compensated for your injuries. After all, owners of retail outlets and other commercial property have a duty to use reasonable care in keeping patrons safe. When they fail to do so, they should be held accountable.

Pursuing a successful negligence case requires proof of several additional elements beside a legal duty to licensees or invitees (i.e. customers). There must be proof that the premises owner failed to use reasonable care in keeping patrons safe.

This can be proven by showing that the owner did not clear the hazard that led to the accident after it was given reasonable notice of it. An example could be found through security footage showing how the hazard was created and testimony from people showing that they complained to the proper people in charge, which shows that notice was given.

Why pedestrians must be careful during spring break

Published on: March 11, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Who’s ready for spring break? After a few months of relentless snow and subfreezing temperatures, we hope that all of our readers have the opportunity to go south (if only for a few days) and enjoy some warm weather in Orlando, Miami, Phoenix or Las Vegas. Indeed, central New York is nice, but a getaway is even nicer.

When on spring break, it is important for pedestrians to be wary of cars and trucks that pass through streets that have heavy traffic. One of the great things about the atmosphere of spring break is the foot traffic and people watching from street front bars and cafés.

However, in these situations the likelihood for pedestrian accidents can increase. Essentially, when drivers and pedestrians have a lot to drink (which commonly happens in spring break haunts) their judgment can become impaired and they may take chances that they may not normally take when sober.

Could the spring thaw lead to hydroplaning on roads?

Published on: March 10, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

According to weather experts, this winter has seen more snow than any time in the last decade. It has certainly made for an “interesting” winter and challenging driving conditions. With the calendar turning to March and warmer temperatures, there are some concerns that a rapid melt could lead to flooding.

Where there are flooding concerns there are also hydroplaning fears (or at least there should be). Hydroplaning refers to the act of a car losing contact with the road and basically floating on the moisture on the road (like a hydroplane). In these instances, a driver could be potentially lose control of their vehicle and crash.

With spring coming and warmer weather expected, the possibility of pools of melting snow collecting on roadways cannot be ignored. Even though it remains to be seen how quickly the snow melt will be, drivers must use reasonable care in avoiding situations where hydroplaning can occur. After all, you don’t need a deep puddle in order for a car’s tires to lose contact with the road.

Family of child determined brain dead sue doctor, hospital

Published on: March 9, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Losing a child is tough enough. To find out that it could have been entirely preventable is enough to make a parent see red. In these instances, it is natural for a parent to want to hold everyone involved accountable; from the physician who treated the child, to the nurses who were supposed to be checking vital signs, to the hospital that incorporated policies that eventually led to the child’s demise.

This is the scenario facing a California family who lost their teenage daughter after she was declared brain dead while on life support. The girl was undergoing treatment for sleep apnea when complications occurred that caused her heart to stop beating.

The lack of oxygen to her brain ostensibly caused further damage, but it touched off a huge legal battle that led to a California judge determining that the child could be moved from a Bay Area hospital to a long-term care facility in New Jersey. In a surprising twist of fate, the girl’s mother reported to ABC News that she could respond to basic commands by moving her hands and feet.

Does an injured person need to mitigate their damages?

Published on: March 4, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A number of our posts have focused on who can be held liable in an accident, and what the injured person may be able to recover in terms of monetary damages. But in the midst of pursuing compensation for an injury, many plaintiffs may not realize that there may be a continuing duty for the plaintiff to mitigate their damages.

Essentially, this means that a person who has been injured due to someone else’s negligence has an obligation to take reasonable steps minimize the effects of the injury. This may include getting medical treatment and following a doctor’s advice regarding rehabilitation regimens. It may also include restricting one’s employment duties (i.e. not lifting a certain amount of weight while recovering or limiting the number of hours standing up). It may also include having a particular surgery to reduce the damage of an ailment.

What qualifies as reasonable steps is determined by what a reasonable prudent person would do to avoid the ongoing damages of an injury, or to expedite the recovery process. If an injured person fails to mitigate damages, he or she could be denied the entire amount of compensation they could be entitled to.

Could multiple defendants be sued for superbug outbreak

Published on: March 3, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Last week we highlighted the “superbug” outbreak at UCLA’s Ronald Reagan Medical Center, where two people died and several others were infected with an antibiotic resistant bacteria called CRE (known as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae). We highlighted the need for hospitals to use reasonable care in sanitizing equipment and cleaning surfaces that may harbor bacteria, and how the failure to use such care in doing these things could lead to a lawsuit.

But when it comes to litigation and multiple culpable parties, it may be difficult to determine which party is actually liable. And the superbug incident may be no different. According to a recent claimsjournal.com report, the manufacturer of the endoscope at the center of the controversy may be at odds with the hospital as to who would be responsible for the outbreak.

After all, the endoscope is reportedly notoriously hard to clean, and the hospital claims that it followed the manufacturer’s protocols. Meanwhile, the manufacturer maintains that meticulous manual sterilization is necessary; which suggests that it believes that the hospital may not have been thorough in cleaning the instruments. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has warned doctors about the difficulty of completely cleaning these instruments.

Nurse who contracted Ebola to sue hospital where she worked

Published on: March 2, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

While a majority of our hospital negligence posts focus on the diseases and ailments that patients may contract, it is not uncommon for nurses and hospital staff to contract diseases when proper treating procedures have not been established, or when the proper equipment is not available to protect nurses and other workers.

This may have been the case when a handful of nurses contracted Ebola last fall. In what was a highly publicized event, two nurses from Texas Presbyterian Health System in Dallas were sickened after caring for a patient who exhibited symptoms and fell ill. The patient died, but the nurses (after being treated at a different hospital) eventually recovered.

One of the nurses is expected to file suit against Texas Presbyterian accusing the hospital of being negligent for not having the proper equipment or providing the proper training so that nurses can effectively treat patients who have Ebola. She is seeking money damages for pain and suffering, mental anguish and loss of future earnings.

‘Heads up’ display may not be the best for distracted driving

Published on: March 1, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The North American International Auto Show in Detroit last month drew more than 200,000 car enthusiasts who were interested in the latest available technologies as well as concept cars that will eventually be on the road in years to come. Indeed, the prevailing talk is about the future of self-driving cars, and how soon they will be seen on the road. However, the current technologies still bring around a great number of fans.

An example of this is the “heads up” display that many automakers are incorporating. Essentially, it is a display where a driver will see information from their display panel basically floating in the air in the driver’s line of sight. So a driver can see how fast they are going, obtain turn by turn directions, and know which direction they are going without looking down at the instrument panel; thus taking their eyes off the road.

The notion behind this innovation is that the less the driver has to look away from the road, the chances of a distracted driving accident can be reduced. However, some safety advocates believe that heads-up displays may not curb distracted driving. In fact, a 2013 study published by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety suggests that additional mental distractions (such as those provided by heads up displays) may lead to the brain being overloaded with information and hamper a driver’s ability to react to common hazards (such as stopped traffic or children running into the street). Regardless of whether this actually is the case, it is a reminder of the duty drivers have to use reasonable care while behind the wheel.