Concetta Lomanto was recently successful in defending a doctor and her practice group at trial in a medical malpractice case. The trial, which took place in Albany County, lasted two and half weeks. The allegation against the doctor was that she delayed in performing or scheduling plaintiff for a surgical repair to his blood vessel. According to plaintiff’s allegation, as a result of that, plaintiff suffers from ongoing nerve damage to his leg, preventing him from engaging in many of the activities he once enjoyed.
During the course of the trial, Concetta Lomanto introduced evidence on behalf of the doctor that definitely demonstrated that at the time the doctor first saw and treated the plaintiff, his condition was absolutely stable. He was not worsening, and his condition did not constitute an emergency or urgent repair. Concetta further introduced evidence that it is not appropriate to perform emergency surgery on a patient who is not in an emergent or urgent condition. Despite the fact that plaintiff was claiming emergency surgery should have been performed, defendant’s evidence showed that the risks of such emergency surgery would far outweigh any benefit when faced with a stable, non-emergent patient.
Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated that the complaints plaintiff currently has are not related to any decreased blood flow to his leg. Instead, some of his complaints were related to preexisting back issues and some were a known complication of the repair surgery.
On the sole question as to any medical malpractice by the doctor, whether it was a deviation from accepted standards of care for her to schedule surgery for the day after she saw the plaintiff, the jury unanimously declared that there was no deviation, no malpractice by the doctor.