Pennsylvania Verdicts

Plaintiff(s):

Myrna Rawdin (Female, 60s), 

Martin Rawdin (Male)

Plaintiff Attorney(s):

Robert F. Morris;
Morris Wilson, P.C.;
Plymouth Meeting,
PA,
for
Myrna Rawdin, Martin Rawdin ■ Seth D. Wilson;
Morris Wilson, P.C.;
Plymouth Meeting,
PA,
for
Myrna Rawdin, Martin Rawdin

Plaintiff Expert(s):

Mona Yudkoff; R.N., M.P.H., C.R.R.N.; Life Care Planning; Bala Cynwyd,
PA called by:
Robert F. Morris, Seth D. Wilson ■ David Brody; M.D.; Internal Medicine; Denver,
CO called by:
Robert F. Morris, Seth D. Wilson ■ Nancy Futrell; M.D.; Neurology; Salt Lake City,
UT called by:
Robert F. Morris, Seth D. Wilson ■ Andrew Verzilli; M.B.A.; Economics; Lansdale,
PA called by:
Robert F. Morris, Seth D. Wilson

Defendant(s):

Mark B. Real M.D., 

PMA Medical Specialists LLC

Defense Attorney(s):

Charles A. Fitzpatrick III;
Rawle & Henderson, LLP;
Philadelphia,
PA,
for
Mark B. Real M.D., PMA Medical Specialists LLC

Defendant Expert(s):

James Morris Jr.;
Internal Medicine;
Ardmore,
PA called by:
Charles A. Fitzpatrick III ■ Christopher Loftus;
Neurosurgery;
Burr Ridge,
IL called by:
Charles A. Fitzpatrick III

On Nov. 1, 2004, plaintiff Myrna Rawdin, in her mid-60s, presented to internist Mark Real, of Limerick, after experiencing lightheadedness, dizziness, garbled speech, and headaches three days before. Real, who had been seeing Rawdin since 2001, reportedly diagnosed her with impacted earwax, and rinsed out her ears. On Nov. 29, Rawdin again suffered stroke-like symptoms, and was diagnosed with a transient ischemic attack, an acute episode of temporary neurologic dysfunction, sometimes called a mini-stroke. Rawdin sued Real and his practice (PMA Medical Specialists LLC), alleging his treatment fell short of the standard of care, constituting negligence and medical malpractice. (The case was originally tried in 2012, resulting in a defense verdict; the Superior Court overturned the verdict in 2014, based on an "unfair comment" made by defense counsel during closing arguments.) Rawdin’s counsel asserted that she was exhibiting symptoms of a stroke when Real saw her on Nov. 1, and the physician failed to properly diagnose her with a transient ischemic attack. This theory was supported by Rawdin’s expert in neurology, who opined that had a proper diagnosis been made, Rawdin would have been promptly sent for a neurological workup which would have detected the stroke, either through a carotid ultrasound or a carotid angiogram. Rawdin’s expert in internal medicine criticized Real for failing to include in his differential diagnosis that she likely suffered a transient ischemic attack and for failing to send her to a neurologist. To further support their theories that Rawdin suffered a transient ischemic attack, Rawdin’s experts pointed to plaque buildup in her carotid artery. The defense’s expert in internal medicine maintained that Real’s treatment of Rawdin met the standard of care. When she had presented to Real, Rawdin had not suffered a transient ischemic attack; her complaints of speech impairment were subjective and there were no witnesses to support her claim. According to the defense’s expert in neurosurgery, Rawdin did not suffer a transient ischemic attack, and a neurological workup after Nov. 1 would not have revealed significant carotid plaque or stenosis, and no surgery would have been required.

Upon suffering a stroke, Rawdin was taken by ambulance to a hospital, where she was diagnosed with a transient ischemic attack and underwent a carotid endarterectomy. Following her hospitalization, she was transferred to an inpatient rehabilitation center to address paralysis (caused by the stroke) on the left (non-dominant) side of her body, including drop foot. Upon discharge, Rawdin underwent weekly physical therapy, which she continued to undergo at the time of settlement, in addition to regular evaluations by her primary care physician and neurologist. According to Rawdin’s expert for life-care planning, she will require continued physical therapy and monitoring by her physicians, for the rest of her life. When her husband is no longer able to help care for her, Rawdin will need the assistance of a nursing attendant, concluded the expert. Rawdin sought between $576,415 and $1,334,549 in future medical costs. Rawdin, who reportedly leads a sedentary lifestyle and requires assistance in most of her activities of daily living, sought damages for pain and suffering. Her husband sought damages for his claim for loss of consortium.

The jury found that Real was negligent and his negligence was a factual cause of harm to the Rawdins, who were determined to receive $6,374,996.51.

Martin Rawdin: $1,000,000 Personal Injury: loss of consortium; Myrna Rawdin: $150,159 Personal Injury: Past Medical Cost; $1,224,838 Personal Injury: Future Medical Cost; $4,000,000 Personal Injury: past and future non-economic damages

Judge:

Thomas P. Rogers

Trial Length:

3
 days

Trial Deliberations:

2.5
 hours

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs’ counsel. Defense counsel did not respond to the reporter’s phone calls.