LAMA V. BORRAS
16 F.3d 473 (1st Cir. 1994)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Borras (D), surgeon and hospital disputed denial of post-verdict
motions in Lama's (P) malpractice action. D argued that neither a general medical standard
favoring conservative treatment nor causation was shown. D, hospital, argued that it was not
shown that violation of a regulation was a proximate cause of P's injuries.
FACTS: Romero Lama (P) was suffering from back pain and was referred to Dr. Borras (D) a
neurosurgeon. D concluded that P had a herniated disk and scheduled surgery. D neither
prescribed nor enforced a regime of absolute bed rest prior to surgery but did instruct, P
to enter the hospital one week before the surgery in order to clean out his lungs, as P was
a heavy smoker. P was not subjected to conservative treatment. D operated but it was not
successful. D operated again five weeks later and did not order pre or post-operative
antibiotics. After the second operation, there were signs that an infection had set in. P's
discomfort became severe and eventually a diagnosis of infection was made and medicine was
given. Because the infection was labeled as Discitis, P was hospitalized for several months
while treatment for the infection took its course. P sued D for malpractice. P won a verdict
of $600,000. Motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial were rejected by the
trial court. D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment