Paraplegia

Published on: July 1, 2024

Anesthesiologist accused of failing to maintain adequate anesthesia levels. Cucalon v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp., 2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 32590 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2015)

by Stephen Bilkis

Cucalon v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp is a medical malpractice case that started off with the patient being diagnosed with a herniated disc and after treatment ending up with paraplegia. A herniated disc, also known as a slipped disc or ruptured disc, occurs when the soft inner core of a spinal disc pushes through a crack in the tougher outer layer. When a disc herniates, the inner core (nucleus pulposus) can press on nearby nerves or the spinal cord, causing pain, numbness, or weakness in the area of the body where the affected nerve travels. Symptoms can vary depending on the location of the herniated disc and the amount of pressure it puts on surrounding structures.

Paraplegia is a condition characterized by impairment or loss of movement and sensation in the lower half of the body, including both legs and often the lower trunk. It results from damage to the spinal cord, typically at the thoracic (chest) level or below. This damage disrupts the communication between the brain and the parts of the body below the injury site, leading to paralysis. Paraplegia is usually caused by traumatic injuries such as spinal cord trauma from accidents, falls, or sports injuries. However, it can also be caused by medical malpractice. That plaintiff in this case alleges that his paraplegia was due to mistakes made by the anesthesiologist.

Background Facts

Published on: July 1, 2024

Expert testimony conflicted on the adequacy of neurological care provided. Arrington v. Okesanya, 2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 30116 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)

by Stephen Bilkis

In Arrington v. Okesanya, the defendant moved for summary judgment under CPLR § 3212. The motion sought dismissal of the plaintiff’s medical malpractice complaint, arguing that Dr. Valsamis did not deviate from accepted medical practice during Reyes Pellot Jr.’s hospitalization at Brooklyn Hospital Center (“TBHC”) in 2014.

In a medical malpractice case, summary judgment dismissing the case requires the defendant to demonstrate convincingly that there was no departure from accepted medical practice or that any such departure did not proximately cause the plaintiff’s injuries. If the plaintiff presents evidence contradicting the defendant’s assertions, the court must carefully weigh the merits of both sides before reaching a decision. However, if the plaintiff presents evidence contradicting the defendant’s assertions, the court will likely deny summary judgment and leave it up to the jury to determine which argument is stronger.

Background Facts

Published on: June 30, 2024

Delayed aortic transection surgery allegedly led to paraplegia. Lee v. Westchester Cnty. Health Care Corp., 219 A.D.3d 1509 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)

by Stephen Bilkis

In a case concerning alleged medical malpractice, the Supreme Court of Westchester County ruled on a motion for summary judgment involving issues surrounding the treatment of a patient following a car accident. A motion for summary judgment to dismiss a medical malpractice lawsuit is a legal maneuver where the defendant argues that the plaintiff’s case lacks merit based on undisputed facts and legal principles. It aims to resolve the case without a full trial by demonstrating that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This motion is common in medical malpractice cases because it allows defendants to challenge the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence early in the litigation process, potentially saving time and resources by avoiding a lengthy trial if the court agrees with their arguments.

Background Facts

Following a car accident in the early morning hours of August 19, 2014, the plaintiff was transported to Westchester Medical Center by ambulance. There he was attended to by several medical professionals. The plaintiff was diagnosed with an aortic transection around 2:45 a.m., though he remained hemodynamically stable initially. Due to concerns over potential complications, the attending cardiothoracic surgeon, Dr. Ramin Malekan, delayed surgical intervention until around 5:30 a.m. Subsequently, the plaintiff experienced a critical deterioration in blood flow to his lower extremities, prompting Malekan to proceed with aortic transection repair. Surgery commenced at 9:52 a.m., successfully addressing the aortic injury but resulting in the plaintiff’s permanent paraplegia.