Pennsylvania Verdicts

Plaintiff(s):

Darlene M. Hill (Female, 31 Years)

Plaintiff Attorney(s):

Francis J. Curran Jr.;
The Curran Firm, P.C.;
Media,
PA,
for
Darlene M. Hill ■ Hugh A. Donaghue;
Donaghue & Labrum, LLP;
Media,
PA,
for
Darlene M. Hill

Plaintiff Expert(s):

Irene Mendelsohn; Vocational Rehabilitation/Counseling; Penn Valley,
PA called by:
Francis J. Curran Jr., Hugh A. Donaghue ■ Terri Patterson; R.N.; Life Care Planning; Plymouth Meeting,
PA called by:
Francis J. Curran Jr., Hugh A. Donaghue ■ Andrew Verzilli; M.B.A.; Economics; Lansdale,
PA called by:
Francis J. Curran Jr., Hugh A. Donaghue ■ Linqiu Zhou; M.D.; Pain Management; Woodbury,
NJ called by:
Francis J. Curran Jr., Hugh A. Donaghue ■ Robert Hurwitz; M.D.; Radiology; Las Vegas,
NV called by:
Francis J. Curran Jr., Hugh A. Donaghue ■ Jeffrey Freed; M.D.; Surgery; New York,
NY called by:
Francis J. Curran Jr., Hugh A. Donaghue

Defendant(s):

Southeast Radiology Ltd., 

Crozer-Keystone Health Systeml

Defense Attorney(s):

Tracie A. Vizza;
O’Brien & Ryan, LLP;
Plymouth Meeting,
PA,
for
Southeast Radiology Ltd., Crozer-Keystone Health Systeml

Defendant Expert(s):

Leo McCluskey;
Neurology;
Philadelphia,
PA called by:
Tracie A. Vizza ■ Paul O’Moore;
Radiology;
Fort Washington,
PA called by:
Tracie A. Vizza ■ Stephen Mechanick;
Psychiatry;
Bryn Mawr,
PA called by:
Tracie A. Vizza

Insurer(s):

MCARE for Brecher ($400,000 policy);
Healthcare Providers Insurance Exchange for Southeast Radiology Ltd. ($1 million policy);
Cassatt Risk Retention Group for Crozer-Keystone Health System d/b/a Taylor Hospital

On Dec. 15, 2009, plaintiff Darlene Hill, a 31-year-old nurse who had undergone a cholecystectomy (surgical removal of the gallbladder) two years earlier, presented to the emergency room at Taylor Hospital, in Ridley Park, with complaints of abdominal pain. She had a CT scan of her abdomen, and the scan’s images were interpreted by Dr. Chard Brecher, a hospital radiologist. At about 5:30 p.m., after he interpreted the CT’s results, Brecher informed the attending emergency room physicians that there was a perforation of the bowel. Later that day, in the hospital’s emergency room Hill had an exploratory laparotomy (an incision in the abdomen, for diagnosis or prior to surgery) and her appendix was removed. The surgeons did not locate the perforation shown in the CT scan. On April 13, 2010, Hill presented to her primary care physician and reported complaints of sharp pain from the incision site which radiated down to her groin. A repeat CT scan of her abdomen was taken and compared by a radiologist with the CT images from 2009, and the radiologist noted significant differences. On April 30, Hill was told by the hospital’s director of risk management that the hospital had improperly labeled another patient’s CT films with her name, which resulted in the unnecessary exploratory laparotomy and the needless removal of her appendix. Hill later developed a nerve entrapment condition at the surgical incision site. In 2012, she was rendered totally disabled. She claimed that her disability was caused by the unnecessary exploratory laparotomy. Hill sued Crozer-Chester Medical Center d/b/a Taylor Hospital, and Southeast Radiology Ltd., the employer of Dr. Brecher. She alleged that Brecher had failed to recognize that the hospital had mixed up Hill’s CT scan with that of another patient, which resulted in an unnecessary exploratory laparotomy and a needless appendectomy, constituting negligence that was a breach of the standard of care, amounting to medical malpractice. Her counsel claimed that the hospital and Southeast Radiology Ltd. were vicariously liable for Brecher’s actions. The hospital reached a confidential settlement with Hill before trial. Hill’s counsel contended that Brecher should have recognized that the films he reviewed on Dec. 15, 2009, were that of another patient: Hill had previously had her gallbladder removed, while the CT images of the other patient showed an intact gallbladder. However, the hospital’s electronic record-keeping system showed that Brecher had not reviewed Hill’s medical history file on Dec. 15, 2009, nor compared the mislabeled CT scan with Hill’s CT scans. His failure to compare the images with medical records was a departure from the standard of care. Counsel noted that Becher’s report, after a review of Hill’s December 2009 CT-scan, erroneously noted that her gallbladder was "healthy and non-remarkable." Counsel further argued the hospital records showed that Brecher, the morning after surgery, accessed Hill’s records, and would have known at that point that he had mixed up Hill’s CT image with that of another patient. Counsel argued that Brecher did not report the mix-up and tried to conceal the error. Defense counsel argued that Brecher did not depart from the standard of care in his review of the 2009 CT scan, which he had believed belonged to Hill. The CT images had focused on the lower right quadrant of the abdomen, and Brecher would have bypassed a review of the upper part of Hill’s anatomy and would have focused on the lower section of the abdomen, where the appendix is located. Brecher stated that he would not have spent time assessing the non-affected area.

Within several months of the surgery, Hill developed a sharp pain in her abdomen, which radiated down to her groin upon certain movements. She was diagnosed with an entrapped nerve and chronic regional pain syndrome in her abdomen that was secondary to the surgery. Hill ultimately had a nerve stimulator implanted her abdomen. In 2012, plaintiff was rendered totally medically disabled. For a several months, Hill used a cane to walk but is required to use a scooter to ambulate. Her counsel contended that Hill’s disability permanently precludes her from returning to work as a registered nurse. Hill claimed that her marriage suffered due to her condition and that it resulted in her getting a divorce. Hill cannot live independently and had to move in with her mother, who is also a nurse and assists her with tasks of daily living. Hill contended that her mother had to make adjustments to her home to accommodate her limitations. Plaintiff’s expert life-care planner testified that Hill would require at-home assistance from medical aides for the rest of her life, and Hill could no longer cook for herself, dress, or shop on her own. Hill sought recovery of past medical expenses, future medical expenses, past lost earnings, and future lost earning capacity. Counsel for the defense argued that Hill had a history of anxiety and gastric issues, and during the three years preceding the surgery, she had made prior complaints of abdominal pain, and that any complaints made after the surgery were unrelated to the exploratory laparotomy or appendectomy.

The jury determined that Crozer-Keystone Health System, which had settled for an undisclosed sum prior to trial, was 80 percent liable for Hill’s injuries and that Southeast Radiology Ltd. was 20 percent liable. The jury awarded Hill $5,991,594. Hill recovered a total of $1,198,319.

Darlene M. Hill: $250,000 Personal Injury: Past Medical Cost; $2,991,594 Personal Injury: Future Medical Cost; $200,000 Personal Injury: Past Lost Earnings Capability; $1,350,000 Personal Injury: Future Lost Earnings Capability; $200,000 Personal Injury: Past Pain And Suffering; $1,000,000 Personal Injury: Future Pain And Suffering

Actual Award:

$1,198,318.80

Judge:

Charles B. Burr II

Trial Length:

8
 days

Trial Deliberations:

6
 hours

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff’s counsel. Defense counsel declined to contribute.