How can a medical legal consultant combat ridiculous claims from the defense in a personal injury case?
Our answer: This case involved a man in his mid sixties who was injured in a rear-end collision at 40 mph. He was test driving a classic car which did not have seat belts installed at the time and when he was rear-ended he violently hit the steering wheel with his abdomen. Once he was transported to the hospital, ER staff determined that he had a traumatic injury and a CT of the abdomen showed fat stranding around the intestine (radiographic sign of internal injury), a cystic lesion thought to be an appendiceal mucocele (sac-like structure in the appendix containing a mucinous material), and free fluid in the right lower quadrant of the abdomen (an indication of abdominal trauma).
The trauma surgery team in this case took the client for an emergency exploratory laparotomy because they were concerned that this traumatic injury had ruptured a pre-existing appendiceal mucocele. Surgical exploration confirmed this fear and pathology performed during surgery revealed that this appendiceal mucocele was in fact, cancerous. Our client had a low-grade adenocarcinoma. Due to the fact that it had ruptured, the leaked mucinous material could have spread cancerous material through the client’s abdomen. The surgeons extended the surgical procedure and carefully looked through the client’s abdominal cavity to ensure that no cancerous material had “seeded.” Luckily, it hadn’t.
After surgery, the client endured a difficult recovery from surgery, intra abdominal chemotherapy, and he now requires ongoing surveillance for malignancy. It is unlikely that this structure would have ever ruptured or caused an issue had it not been for this traumatic injury. Our attorney client simply sued for damages to cover the cost of his medical treatment and for the property damage to the vehicle, a generous offer given the harm caused.
The defense declined, claiming first that this malignant structure might have burst at some other time. This was preposterous. We were able to prove that it had occurred during the collision. When their first claim didn’t fly, they made an even bolder assertion… that their client had actually done our client a favor by “making him aware of the cancer!” By leveraging the medical literature and performing a clear statistical analysis we were able to prove that not only had they not done him a favor, he had been exposed to significantly greater risk of harm due to the rupture. We attacked both of these ridiculous claims directly in our report and the defense was forced to settle.
If you’re dealing with ridiculous claims from the defense in a case, give me a call or send me an email to discuss a strategy.