A man went to the hospital in February 2010 with slurred speech; he was confused and disoriented. It was the fourth and most severe such episode he had experienced in eight months. The man was admitted to intensive care and underwent a CT scan and MRI. The neurosurgeon believed the patient may have been suffering from hydrocephalus, which is potentially fatal. The patient was monitored for 24 hours, at which time the neurosurgeon concluded that the patient did not have pressure or fluid on the brain; the infection that developed had resolved. He was released from the hospital five days later. Three months later, his 11-year-old daughter found him dead in bed. The medical examiner determined that the cause of death was fluid on the brain. He left behind a wife and three young children.

The family filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the doctor claiming that he should have placed a shunt or drain in her husband’s brain and that he was negligent for failing to do so. The jury agreed and awarded a $4.2 million verdict. The amount was lowered to $1.87 due to state caps. The doctor appealed the decision. The higher court agreed with the doctor stating that the decision was based on insufficient and unsupported evidence and that it should be overturned. Specifically, they stated that the plaintiff failed to prove that the doctor was negligent and that this led directly to the patient’s death.

Most likely, the medical expenses alone left this family financially strapped. When a plaintiff is dealing will the loss of income and mounting unpaid bills, litigation funding can be the emergency cash needed to get through the litigation process, including an appeal. Once case documentation is reviewed and the strength of the case determined, approvals can be available within 24 – 48 hours. No money is owed until the case successfully settles, at which time repayment is made from the proceeds of the case. The most attractive part about lawsuit funding is that if the case is lost, as happened on appeal in this case, repayment is completely waived.

If you have filed, or plan to file, a medical malpractice lawsuit and are represented by an attorney, you may be eligible for medical malpractice litigation funding. For a free consultation or to apply, complete the online contact form or contact Litigation Funding Corporation at 1.866.LIT.FUND. We may have the solution you need to stay financially afloat in hard times.

The statute and rule set a hard, 30-day deadline for the other party to accept or reject the proposed settlement, and the settlement may be deemed rejected if the party does not respond to it. Assuming the proposal was made in good faith, the party who extended it may seek recovery of attorney fees if they later prevail in court (for defendants, if plaintiff receives at least 25 percent less than the proposed offer and for plaintiff, if judgment is at least 25 percent more than the amount of the offer). The whole purpose is to avoid or reduce backlog in the courts and encourage parties to save time and money by settling.

In the recent case of Ochoa v. Koppel, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal issued a decision pertaining to the length of time one has to accept or reject a settlement after requesting more time. The court decided that the 30-day limit is a strict one, and can’t be tolled while awaiting a decision from the trial court after requesting an extension. This decision directly contrasts with the ruling issued by Florida’s 5th District Court of Appeal in Goldy v. Corbett Cranes Services, Inc. in 1997. The conflict was certified to the Florida Supreme Court.

According to court records in Ochoa, this was a car accident lawsuit stemming from a crash that occurred in 2011. Less than two years later, In April 2013, plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the alleged at-fault driver.

Then in September 2013, plaintiff served defendant with a proposal for settlement, pursuant to the aforementioned statute and rule. The proposal offered to dismiss the action with prejudice if defendant agreed to a lump sum payment of $100,000 to compensation plaintiff for her injuries. That proposal indicated that it would be deemed rejected if it was not accepted within 30 days after service. The proposal also indicated it would be withdrawn if not accepted within that time frame. Plaintiff also sent notice to the court that same day that the case was ready for trial.

One day before that 30-day time limit was up, defendant filed a motion seeking to enlarge the time in which to respond. She said she had just received through discovery results of a new MRI and plaintiff’s deposition hadn’t even been taken yet. The matter was set for a hearing on Dec. 2, 2013.

At that hearing, the court did not make a decision, but asked for more information to be received within 3 days. One day after the hearing, however, defendant responded to plaintiff with a notice of acceptance of the proposed settlement.

However at a subsequent hearing, the court denied defendant’s request to enlarge settlement. Plaintiff then filed a motion to strike the notice of acceptance of settlement as untimely. Defendant opposed the motion, citing Goldy. She argued the period of time she had to respond was tolled while awaiting the court’s decision on her request for enlargement. Trial court agreed and dismissed plaintiff’s lawsuit under the terms of the proposed settlement.

The 2nd DCA reversed. The court ruled that to offer automatic tolling when one files a motion for enlargement would be to give the party filing additional time than what is prescribed in the rule, and this is done without an exercise of judicial supervision or discretion until the motion is decided. Further, to hold that a motion to enlarge that 30-day period automatically tolls the time period would be to insert text into a judicial rule, and that is not the role of the court.

If you have been a victim of a traffic accident, call Chalik & Chalik at (954) 476-1000 or 1 (800) 873-9040.

Additional Resources:

Ochoa v. Koppel, May 20, 2016, Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal

More Blog Entries:

Moreno v. City of Gering – Government Liability in Bus Accident, April 27, 2016, Miami Car Accident Lawyer Blog

The University of Michigan and the VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System teamed up to study the effects of mindfulness training among veterans suffering from PTSD; the positive results of the study came as a surprise even to the researchers. Mindfulness training can be thought of as a form of meditation and yoga.

Veterans often describe their PTSD symptoms as “an endless video loop, horrible memories, and thoughts… they intrude at the quietest moments, and don’t seem to have an off switch.” Researchers hoped that mindfulness training could create that “off switch” these veterans are lacking.

The study was completed over 4 months of weekly sessions where veterans learned to focus on in-the-moment attention and awareness. The surprising effects were realized when researchers compared the pre- and post-study fMRI (functional MRI) brain scans.

Prior to the training, there was extra activity in brain regions involved in responding to threats or other outside problems. This extra activity is what causes that endless cycle of memories and bad thoughts. After the training, though, this activity diminished significantly.

Researchers say that veterans were able to literally change their brain by “developing stronger connections between two other brain networks: the one involved in our inner, sometimes meandering, thoughts, and one involved in shifting and directing attention.” Simply put, the participants could now get themselves out of being “stuck” in those memory loops. Participants also saw decreased scores on a standard scale of PTSD severity.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/brain-changes-seen-in-veterans-with-ptsd-after-mindfulness-training#.VzU1ZzLLApE.linkedin

The University of Michigan and the VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System teamed up to study the effects of mindfulness training among veterans suffering from PTSD; the positive results of the study came as a surprise even to the researchers. Mindfulness training can be thought of as a form of meditation and yoga.

Veterans often describe their PTSD symptoms as “an endless video loop, horrible memories, and thoughts… they intrude at the quietest moments, and don’t seem to have an off switch.” Researchers hoped that mindfulness training could create that “off switch” these veterans are lacking.

The study was completed over 4 months of weekly sessions where veterans learned to focus on in-the-moment attention and awareness. The surprising effects were realized when researchers compared the pre- and post-study fMRI (functional MRI) brain scans.

Prior to the training, there was extra activity in brain regions involved in responding to threats or other outside problems. This extra activity is what causes that endless cycle of memories and bad thoughts. After the training, though, this activity diminished significantly.

Researchers say that veterans were able to literally change their brain by “developing stronger connections between two other brain networks: the one involved in our inner, sometimes meandering, thoughts, and one involved in shifting and directing attention.” Simply put, the participants could now get themselves out of being “stuck” in those memory loops. Participants also saw decreased scores on a standard scale of PTSD severity.

A new study shows mindfulness training may serve as a promising way for veterans with PTSD to manage their thoughts. Mindfulness is an alternative therapy that focuses the mind on being aware and in the present. University of Michigan Medical School researchers noted significant improvements in veterans who participated in mindfulness training as part of a study.

Out of 23 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with PTSD, nine underwent regular group therapy while 14 received sessions that included mindfulness training. Veterans in the latter group were encouraged to meditate on their sensations and surroundings in order to prevent their mind from drifting back to traumatic events. After four months of weekly sessions, the veterans who were given mindfulness training experienced more relief from their PTSD symptoms.

The researchers found surprising results when they compared the veterans’ brain activity prior to the mindfulness sessions and after them. In an MRI conducted after the training, they noted stronger links between different areas of the brain related to shifting attention and processing thoughts.

Lead study author Anthony King said, “The brain findings suggest that mindfulness training may have helped the veterans develop more capacity to shift their attention and get themselves out of being ‘stuck’ in painful cycles of thoughts.”

The researchers suggested their study should be repeated with a larger group of veterans. They also emphasized that mindfulness should not be used as the only treatment for PTSD. In addition, it is essential for veterans with PTSD to receive help from a trained professional.

According to the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center, over 300,000 service members have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the past 15 years. Concussions are among the least severe of such injuries, which are mostly caused by bombs.

Researchers at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland, performed MRI brain scans on 834 active service members with blast-related concussions between 2009 and 2014. The results found brain scarring in 52 percent of injured service members, signs of bleeding in 7 percent and pituitary gland irregularities in one third of patients.

Although MRIs have revealed a high occurrence of brain damage, the technology is too expensive to scan all veterans. Radiologist Dr. Gerard Riedy, the study’s lead author, hopes the findings can result in more accurate diagnoses and targeted treatment of brain injuries. Researchers said they aim to test existing imaging methods and find out which ones accurately identify TBI. A portable version of the exam will then be designed for the Department of Veterans Affairs and the military.

“The current diagnosis is based on subjective information. A diagnosis from an objective method like MRI would greatly enhance the possibility of treating veterans with the correct treatment paradigms,” said Riedy. “The TBI treatments and PTSD treatment paradigms can be vastly different. So in my book an accurate diagnosis is key to any hope at meaningful recovery.”

Distinguishing between TBI and post-traumatic stress (PTS) can be challenging as they are often identified by similar symptoms. However, both conditions require different treatments that can have adverse effects when interchanged. For example, the antidepressants used for treating PTS can prove harmful to people with TBI.

The jury awarded $28,215,278.00 to Anna Rahm for pain and suffering, for future loss of earnings and for future medical expenses after a four-week trial. The jury found Kaiser Permanente liable for improper medical treatment that resulted in Rahm losing parts of her spine, half of her pelvis and her right leg.

According to the lawsuit, in 2008, at the age of 16, Rahm began experiencing pain in her lower back, which later radiated to her right leg. She pursued chiropractic treatment, which was unsuccessful, and then sought an MRI at Kaiser Permanente. Rahm claimed that, accompanied by her mother, she saw a primary care physician and a physical medicine specialist at Kaiser Permanente and requested an MRI.

She alleged in the lawsuit that the doctors refused to order an MRI and refused to document the request. The doctors claimed at trial that no MRI was ever requested.

An MRI was eventually performed on July 2, 2009, and it revealed an osteosarcoma (an aggressive tumor) in Rahm’s pelvis. She required surgery that resulted in the loss of her leg and of portions of her pelvis and spine. Rahm’s lawsuit argued that the hospital’s refusal to perform an MRI resulted in a four-month delay in diagnosing the tumor, which in turn caused the loss of her leg.

Paul Greenberg is a Chicago medical malpractice lawyer with Briskman Briskman & Greenberg. To learn more call 1.877.595.4878 or visit http://www.briskmanandbriskman.com/.

According to court documents filed by a 52-year-old New York man, the injection he received before an MRI he had in late September 2010 sparked a serious hip infection. By the end of the month, he checked back into hospital with unrelenting pain. A culture revealed a serious bacterial infection.

The plaintiff, a construction worker, met with an orthopedic surgeon who sent him home without any further treatment, despite lab results indicating a virulent bacterial infection needing immediate treatment. Two days later, the man had to be rushed back to the hospital, where doctors discovered that the untreated infection had damaged his hip badly enough that he required a hip replacement. 

He was no longer able to work at his job, and his other previously enjoyed activities were limited.

The man chose to file a medical malpractice lawsuit seeking compensation for his injuries and asking the court to hold the surgeon who did not treat his infection responsible for his unnecessary hip replacement surgery. The jury found for the plaintiff, awarding him $2.3 million.

Before the award, the plaintiff may have been in a difficult situation financially, as he was no longer able to work in construction. Even with savings on hand, he would not have been able to pay the medical bills amassed as a result of his hospital visits and surgery. One solution that may have assisted him in dealing confidently with his financial obligations would have been to fill out an online application form for litigation funding.

Litigation funding, also called pre-settlement funding, offers plaintiffs cash that arrives in less than 48 hours. The amount the applicant receives is usually predicated based on what the attorney of record suggests that a jury may award. 

The plaintiff can also call and apply for a lawsuit loan. All that is required is the name of the plaintiff’s lawyer and the case details. Once the application has been approved, funds are transferred expeditiously to help the plaintiff deal with all expenses and to give him or her the peace of ignoring insurance companies wanting a quick, fast and cheap settlement.

Daren Monroe writes for Litigation Funding Corp. To learn more about lawsuit funding, visit http://www.litigationfundingcorp.com/.

The NFL has partnered with GE to provide $20 million in grants to researchers working to advance the diagnosis and treatment of mild TBI. They recently announced 16 winners in the first stage of the “Head Health Challenge.” Each winner will receive a $300,000 research grant, and up to six more will receive a further $500,000 in 2015.

Over 400 entries from 27 countries were received in the contest. Its stated goal is to improve safety for athletes, military troops and the general public.

Banyan Biomarkers, Inc. of Alachua, Florida is one winner. The company is developing a blood test to rapidly detect mild and moderate brain trauma. Banyan researchers will work with University of Florida athletes to study biomarkers, cognitive testing and neuroimaging on athletes with concussions.

Another winner is the University of California, Santa Barbara. The UCSB Brain Imaging Center is developing computer software to identify individual damaged brain connections using MRI scans.

Accurate diagnosis of TBI remains difficult, treatment even more so. TBI is very common among auto accident victims, and its debilitating effects can last for years.

If you need to speak with a brain injury attorney or lawyer, Call Joyce & Reyes at 1.888.771.1529 or visit more of http://www.joyceandreyespa.com/.

The case arose out of an incident where the plaintiff was rear ended, causing his head to slam against the driver’s side window, and pushed his car into the middle of the intersection. The plaintiff claimed injuries to his head, neck, back, and leg as a result of the accident. A jury found in his favor, and awarded him $13,000.

The defendant, Safeway, appealed the decision, arguing that the trial court erred in allowing testimony from the plaintiff’s doctor, and also in allowing the jury to consider an aggravation of a pre-existing condition.

The plaintiff’s doctor testified at trial regarding the result of his MRI, which showed a herniated disk, which he believed to be consistent with a timeline of around when the accident took place. Safeway argued that this testimony shouldn’t have been admissible, because the plaintiff should have had to prove that the injury was caused by the accident in order to be admissible.

The rule for requiring expert medical testimony regarding injuries, as adopted by the Georgia Supreme Court, states that:

Expert evidence is required where a `medical question’ involving truly specialized medical knowledge (rather than the sort of medical knowledge that is within common understanding and experience) is needed to establish a causal link between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury.

That being said, however, the court held that back injuries resulting from car accident are squarely within common experience and understanding of jury members. They then cited another car accident case, for the premise that a back injury resulting from a car accident does not raise a medical question requiring expert testimony on causation.

Therefore, the court held that the issue of whether the injury was caused by the collision was for the jury to decide, and that the allowance of the testimony was not in error.

The court further disagreed with Safeway’s argument challenging the validity of the trial court having instructed the jury to consider whether the presence or aggravation of a preexisting condition was at play, following testimony regarding the plaintiff’s recently healed back injury was improper for essentially the same reason, i.e. that it was not proved. The court held that the evidence presented at trial regarding plaintiff’s prior car accident and injury was  was sufficient to support a jury instruction on preexisting condition, and the trial court did not err in so instructing the jury.

This common sense approach is an affirmation of the reality that we all know: car accidents lead to neck and back injuries. Requiring expert testimony on this matter in every case would be not only silly, but wasteful, inefficient, and simply unfair.

If you have been injured in car accident due to another individual’s negligent driving,  the first thing you should do after seeking medical treatment and contacting law enforcement, is to contact an experienced Atlanta car accident attorney as soon as possible. Stephen M.  Ozcomert is a knowledgeable personal injury attorney with over 20 years of experience, and is experienced with representing individuals and their families who have been injured as a result of the negligent or reckless driving of others in Atlanta and throughout Georgia. Call us today  at (404)-370-1000 in order to schedule your free initial consultation, or you can reach us through our website.

More Blog Posts:

Canadian Driver Charged with Vehicular Homicide in Deadly I-75 Accident, Atlanta Personal Injury Lawyer Blog, published November 11, 2013

Four Tragic Accidents in Metro Atlanta Tragic Start to November, Atlanta Personal Injury Lawyer Blog, published November 4, 2013

“Soccer players are repeatedly hitting their head [or, using the top of their head to redirect the ball], and we know that multiple head injuries tend to be worse than just one,” Lipton stated. “My area [of expertise] is mild traumatic brain injury, so I look at how much does it take (to have a lasting effect).”

To study those cumulative effects, Lipton asked 37 amateur soccer players, nearly three-quarters of whom were male, to approximate how often he or she headed a ball per year, so he could group them into three categories: low heading, medium heading, and high heading. He then scanned their brains with a special MRI test called diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and tested the players’ memory skills.

Bearing in mind that participants’ age averaged 31 and that they’d played soccer for an average of 22 years and for about 10 months in the last year, Lipton determined that players who headed a ball about or more than 1,800 times per year scored lower on memory tests.

Why?

“Overall, the imaging showed that players who reported heading the ball more frequently had areas of the brain with lower FA [fractional anisotropy] values,” Fox News reported. Or, as Lipton stated, “The more heading people did, the more likely they were to have abnormalities of brain microstructure and worse cognitive performance.”

Given the small scale of this study, Lipton isn’t yet urging soccer moms to buy helmets for their children, but that may come. The National Institutes of Health has awarded him a $3 million grant to continue his research.

“I think that what people should take away from this at this point is that there may be risk involved in heading; that’s about all we can say … The biggest message here is we need to do the research and confirm what the risks are, and if they’re confirmed, develop ways to address them,” he said.

Below, Cleveland traumatic brain injury attorney Chris Mellino enumerates TBI symptoms and discusses the difference between a head injury and a brain injury.

In such cases, the doctor who failed to diagnose the condition or who improperly addressed the condition may be considered negligent. If this proves to be the case, parents may consult an Ohio brain injury lawyer about filing a medical malpractice claim.

What types of brain damage can occur with hypoglycemia in a newborn? 

Occipital brain injury is one type. This is the part of the brain that allows for visual capability. When there is damage, it can cause a variety of perception problems, such as visual impairment. Another complication of this brain damage is epilepsy. This brain disorder can be severe, disabling or even life-threatening.

Seizures can cause: 

• muscle spasms;
• convulsions; and
• may even lead to unconsciousness.

Although there may be treatments that help manage epilepsy, if there are ongoing seizures it may cause permanent brain damage. This could affect a child’s behavior and emotions.

One British study published in Pediatrics in 2008 included 35 term infants with symptomatic neonatal hypoglycemia and an early brain MRI scan. Researchers found that 94 percent of infants in a study had white matter abnormalities. They concluded, “White matter injury was not confined to the posterior regions; hemorrhage, middle cerebral artery infarction, and basal ganglia/thalamic abnormalities were seen, and cortical involvement was common.”

Treatment for Newborn Hypoglycemia 

Keep in mind that sometimes treatment appears to work and blood sugar levels may return to normal. But sometimes they will start to drop again, which is why ongoing monitoring might be necessary.

Parents who suspect that brain damage from hypoglycemia is related to complications because of medical malpractice may consult Mellino Robenalt LLC at 440-333-3800 for legal help. A lawyer may refer to a medical expert who can testify regarding how a doctor handled hypoglycemia in the newborn.

At the same time, not all birth injuries are caused by medical negligence. Some are just part of what can be a difficult birthing process. A Cleveland, Ohio medical malpractice attorney can help determine if it might have been preventable and if the medical care provided was unreasonable.

Using the APGAR Test to Assess a Newborn’s Condition 

The APGAR is a test performed immediately after birth to assess: 

• breathing;
• heart rate;
• muscle tone;
• reflexes; and
• skin color.

Each category gets a 0, 1, or 2. Babies with lower scores may require further testing or monitoring or a medical diagnosis may reveal a mild to serious medical condition requiring treatment.

Assessing the Baby’s Physical Condition to Reach Medical Diagnosis 

An assessment of physical injuries may be one the primary ways to diagnose a birth injury, though in some cases it may not be enough to reach a medical diagnosis on its own; further testing may be required.

For instance, forceps or vacuum extraction might be used if there are difficulties during delivery. Minor bruising or marks may not be a major problem, but swelling may indicate injuries like cephalhematoma, which is bleeding between the skull and the periosteum.

The swelling itself may be a physical indication of the condition which may not require treatment, but some severe cases may lead to jaundice if not treated, so blood tests may be performed to monitor bilirubin levels.

Imaging Technology to Reach a Medical Diagnosis 

Some conditions, such as those pertaining to the brain, may require medical imaging to give the physician an image of the brain. Cerebral palsy, for example, may require imaging techniques such as MRI, CT scans, or ultrasounds. These imaging techniques allow the physician to examine potential areas of damage or development that may indicate cerebral palsy or other conditions.

Assessing Whether Birth Injury is Related to Medical Negligence 

Parents whose child has been diagnosed with a birth injury may consult a Cleveland, Ohio medical malpractice attorney to discuss a suspected case of negligence on behalf of a doctor. A lawyer will examine whether the doctor may have caused the injury itself, contributed to it, or failed to act in a manner that may have prevented complications.

A medical expert may be called upon for help evaluating the standard of care given the particular scenario that may have led to a birth injury. If the doctor is found to have failed to act with a reasonable standard of care, he or she may be considered negligent and the Cleveland, Ohio medical malpractice attorney may help file a claim.

Talking to a Cleveland, Ohio Medical Malpractice Attorney about Filing a Claim 

Some examples in which a doctor may be considered negligent are: 

• delays in treatment;
• failure to anticipate complications/problems;
• not responding to signs of fetal distress; and
• misusing equipment.

Contact the Cleveland, Ohio medical malpractice attorneys at Mellino Robenalt LLC to discuss a potential claim if a medical diagnosis reveals a birth injury you suspect is related to negligence.