Firm Results

The jury returned a defense verdict after a three day trial in Miami. The defendant, an obstetrician/gynecologist, had allegedly removed a perfectly normal right ovary from a 46 year old woman who had been complaining of left lower quadrant pain for almost 4 years. Jon Lynn represented the defendant and convinced the jury that, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision to remove the ovary was reasonable and certainly within the standard of care.

Lou La Cava and Jim Wetzel obtained a defense verdict for an OB/GYN physician in a two week wrongful death medical malpractice case tried in Tavares, Florida. The Plaintiff alleged the 55 year old patient died as a result of unrecognized blood loss during a supracervical robotic hysterectomy. Plaintiff alleged the physician caused the bleed and then did not take appropriate steps to control it. The defense argued that the physician performed the surgery within the acceptable standard of care and the patient did not die as a result of a bleed but unfortunately suffered a cardiac arrythmia. The patient was survived by her husband and two daughters who had claims as survivors. After hearing all of the evidence, the jury returned a verdict finding the physician was not negligent and negligence was not the legal cause of the patient’s death.

Lou La Cava obtained a defense verdict for an uninsured physician in an 8 day medical malpractice case tried in Pinellas County. The plaintiff argued the vascular surgeon was negligent in ordering unnecessary tests and performing an unnecessary renal angioplasty on a patient which they claimed led to the loss of the patient’s kidney. It was further alleged there was a lack of informed consent because the physician did not inform the patient about various physical disabilities he had and several months after the procedure applied for total disability with a date relating back to before the date of the procedure. After Plaintiff’s case was concluded Mr. La Cava’s motion for directed verdict on the informed consent claim was granted by the court. The jury later deliberated on the remaining claims and found the defendant physician was not negligent and negligence was not the legal cause of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Mr. La Cava received administrative assistance at the trial from April La Cava and was also assisted during the trial by Andrew Hudson a third year law student and law clerk with La Cava and Jacobson.

Lou La Cava and Barbara Chapman obtained a defense verdict in a case filed against an ophthalmologist in Pinellas County. The Plaintiff saw the defendant, a retinal specialist, due to retinal tears and retinal detachments. He received laser treatments as well as vitrectomies and a scleral buckle procedure. The Plaintiff alleged that due to an improperly performed fluid-gas exchange performed in the doctor’s office the patient developed increased intraocular pressure causing loss of blood supply to the optic nerve. The Plaintiff went on to have a total loss of vision and eventually had to have his eye enucleated. Although there were some documentation issues, the defense argued that the care and treatment provided was well within the standard of care. The defense also successfully argued that the plaintiff failed to prove causation because they were unable to demonstrate that the patient’s eye pain after the procedure was due to increased intraocular pressure. The plaintiff attorney asked the jury to award between four and nine million dollars. After a one week trial the jury returned a verdict finding in favor of the ophthalmologist.

Lou La Cava and Shari Smith obtained an excellent resolution of a case just before closing argument in a hospital medical malpractice case tried in Broward County. The Plaintiffs alleged that the hospital negligently failed to offer CPR training to the parents of a premature infant prior to discharge. Three weeks after discharge the child had a cardiorespiratory arrest and ended up with severe neurological damage and is in a persistent vegetative state. She was 6 years old at the time of trial. The Plaintiffs alleged the child would have had much less damage if the mother could have provided CPR before the paramedics arrived 8 minutes after they were called. A settlement could not be reached prior to trial because the Plaintiffs would not accept the amount offered since it was below the past medical lien and they felt the case had a very high settlement value due to the extent of damages. After a two week trial putting many holes in the Plaintiffs’ case, the Plaintiffs were given a last chance, take it or leave it settlement offer that remained below the past medical expense lien. The Plaintiffs accepted the offer to resolve the case.