Archive - Medical Malpractice

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

September 25, 2017

Summary Judgement in Prison Abuse Case

Sherry H. Rogers and Holly Williams won summary judgment in Stockmyer v. Fetroe, et al. in federal court.  The case involved claims by a pro se plaintiff for deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment and for malpractice against his treatment providers based on medical care he received while incarcerated.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

April 11, 2017

Dismissal as a Matter of Law

Marc Rosenberg won dismissal as a matter of law in Boston v. Kitsap County, et al., in which a plaintiff sued a county and its medical provider under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming the defendants were deliberately indifferent to medical needs of an inmate in the county jail.  Plaintiff also brought a claim against the jail for negligent design resulting in a trip and fall.  Plaintiff served the County with a Notice of Tort Claim, pursuant to RCW 4.96.020, and filed a lawsuit more than three years after events alleged in the pleadings.   The district court denied a Rule 12(b)(6) motion on statute of limitations as to the federal claim.  Upon a certified question, the Ninth Circuit reversed and held that RCW 4.96.020 does not operate to toll the state’s general limitations period for claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

March 29, 2017

Summary Judgment victory

John C. Versnel, III, Aaron P. Gilligan, and Daniel C. Mooney won summary judgment in Perez v. Pediatric DDS.  Plaintiff claimed $15,000,000 in damages when a minor child suffered permanent right eye blindness after undergoing general anesthesia for extensive dental treatment. John and Aaron moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims, citing lack of evidence of proximate cause. Dan argued in reply that, even after a three-month continuance, plaintiff still lacked admissible expert testimony on causation. The court denied the motion. John and Dan moved for reconsideration, at which point Plaintiffs came forward with the required testimony. Dan argued the new evidence was untimely and not proper on reconsideration. The court agreed, reversing its prior ruling, and dismissing all of Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. Paralegal Helen Mooney was instrumental in the motion as well.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

December 8, 2016

Win in Court of Appeals, Div. III

John C. Versnel, III and Aaron P. Gilligan won on appeal in Hedman v. OMS in the Court of Appeals, Division 3.  The lawsuit arose from alleged dental malpractice claims.  The Spokane County  Superior Court granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment because plaintiff failed to produce medical testimony that the oral surgeon breached the standard of care.  When plaintiff appealed, the Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment dismissal.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

November 23, 2016

Dental Malpractice Defense Verdict

John Versnel, III and Dan Mooney obtained a unanimous defense verdict for their client in Lee v. DDS in King County Superior Court.  The plaintiff sued her dentist, John and Dan’s client, and her orthodontist alleging a failure to diagnose and treat her ongoing periodontal disease, and allowing her to be kept in orthodontic treatment too long.  Plaintiff claimed damages were bone loss, tooth mobility and resulting debilitating neuropathic pain.  Plaintiff’s last demand was $1,000,000.  After a two-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict finding the dentist did not violate the standard of care.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

April 18, 2016

Summary Judgment Dismissal of Dentist

Aaron P. Gilligan and Chris L. Winstanley won summary judgment dismissal of plaintiffs’ dental malpractice claim in Early v. Dentist brought in Pierce County Superior Court.  Plaintiffs sued the dentist, alleging negligence, outrage, and negligent infliction of emotional distress arising from an alleged facial nerve injury following a dental procedure.  Aaron and Chris moved for summary judgment on the grounds plaintiffs lacked expert testimony to support breach and proximate cause.  After the court granted plaintiffs an additional 90 days to secure expert testimony, plaintiffs produced an opinion from an expert alleging breach.  The defense pointed out the opinion failed to show such alleged breach proximately caused the alleged injury.  The court agreed and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

November 20, 2013

Claims of Vicarious Liability and Corporate Negligence Against Hospital Dismissed

Craig L. McIvor, David M. Norman and Melinda R. Drogseth obtained summary judgment of dismissal in the matter of Dudley v. Hospital. Plaintiff had a resection of her pituitary gland performed in 1998 after an MRI showed a potential tumor. She developed complications, and claimed that she discovered in 2011 that no tumor was present. Plaintiff alleged that the hospital was vicariously liable for the negligence of the surgeons and for their failure to secure informed consent for the surgery. She also alleged that the hospital was independently negligent for granting privileges to the surgeon and for failing to prevent him from performing the surgery. Craig and David filed a motion for summary judgment of dismissal as to all claims, and the court granted the motion, dismissing all of plaintiff’s claims with prejudice.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

November 19, 2013

Defense Verdict in $10 Million Claim of Negligence Trial

Craig L. McIvor and David M. Norman  obtained a defense verdict in Glenn v. Ob/Gyn Physician.  Plaintiffs were the parents of an infant that died shortly after his delivery.  Plaintiffs alleged that Craig and David’s client was negligent in failing to adequately monitor the baby’s declining condition before the delivery and in failing to make preparations for and performing a “crash” cesarean section in a more expeditious manner.  At trial, plaintiffs asked the jury for approximately $10 million in general damages.  After a three-week trial in King County, the jury found that defendant was not negligent.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

October 24, 2013

Verdict for Physician in Emergency Room Case

Craig L. McIvor and David M. Norman obtained a defense verdict for their emergency room physician client in the matter of Hines v. Health Care Providers.  Plaintiff alleged that the defendants negligently failed to have the patient transfused, causing his eventual death 10 days later.  After a hard fought four week trial in King County, the jury returned a complete defense verdict.

Lee Smart attorneys have extensive experience in the Areas of Practice shown to the right. Click on one to learn more about our expertise and our attorneys in that practice.

Defense Verdict in Fracture Case

Sherry H. Rogers and David M. Norman won a defense verdict at trial in Millikan v. Orthopedic Surgeon.  Plaintiff had a minimally-displaced tibial plateau fracture and was treated by Sherry and David’s client.  Plaintiff alleged that defendant’s order to keep the fractured leg immobilized for six weeks fell below the standard of care, and that early motion should have been prescribed no more than two weeks after the fracture to prevent further injury to the knee.  After a six-day trial in Snohomish Country, the jury rendered a defense verdict.

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn RSS

Archives