Gordon & Silber has developed a particular sub-specialty in the defense of ophthalmological malpractice claims, including cases dealing with cataract surgery, refractive surgery including lasik, diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, and corneal transplants.
Representative Cases
Defense Verdict — Complete Vision
Loss from Cataract Surgery We received a defense verdict in a case where plaintiff alleged she suffered a complete loss of vision in her right eye due to an unnecessary cataract surgery, without informed consent, where the surgeon had negligently placed an intraocular lens causing inflammation leading to her blindness. Plaintiff claimed the surgery was not necessary since her vision was not that bad and the risks were not explained to her. She testified that directly after the surgery she had no useful vision. Making the case more difficult was the fact that our client never documented in her chart plaintiffís visual complaints which justified the surgery. Nor did she dictate her operative report until one month after the surgery. She also referred to the elderly plaintiff in her chart as a "malingerer" on several occasions. We set out to demonstrate that (1) our client attempted to treat plaintiffís vision with non-surgical means; (2) although not absolutely necessary, the surgery was the only way to improve plaintiffís vision problems; (3) plaintiff was fully advised of the risks of the surgery, including loss of vision; (4) despite the complication, the cataract surgery was well handled; (5) the surgery would have resulted in an improvement of vision if she had taken the prescribed eye drops; and (6) the loss of vision was not caused by the inflammation, but rather, a mini-stroke several days after the operation which could not have been predicted or prevented. The jury came back with a defense verdict, finding no malpractice.
Defense Verdict — Contraindicated
Lasik Surgery Plaintiff sued our client after undergoing bilateral Lasik surgery. The plaintiff alleged that our client failed to diagnose pre-existing epithelial basement membrane dystrophy (EBMD), which, if diagnosed, would have made the surgery contraindicated. As a result he alleged the need to undergo enhancement surgery of both eyes, as well as corneal scrapings to address epithelial ingrowth. He also alleged an inability to drive at night, glare, starbursts and distorted vision.
Settlement for Nuisance Value —
Negligent Lasik Surgery, Lack of Informed Consent Plaintiff sued our client after undergoing bilateral Lasik surgery. Plaintiff alleged that it was a departure to have performed the procedure on the same day of the evaluation and after the plaintiff had been pharmacologically dilated. In addition, plaintiff alleged a failure of informed consent. Plaintiff alleged de-centered ablations of both eyes and that, as a result of the de-centered ablations, she lost her best corrected visual acuity and suffered from glare, halos, star bursting and dry eyes. |
|||||||
|
New York Office: |
|||||||
