Jury: Virginia Mason should pay couple $8.5M in disfigured-penis case

[TexasTowelie]

A jury awarded $8.5 million to a Seattle couple after the man underwent a surgery at Virginia Mason Medical Center and developed complications that led to months of reconstructing his penis.

The couple said they had insisted that a specific doctor handle a portion of the procedure, but they learned later that a less-experienced doctor did so.

The verdict Wednesday in King County Superior Court found Virginia Mason was negligent in causing injury to Matthew and Dr. Sarah Hipps. The jury awarded $6 million to Matthew Hipps and $2.5 million to Sarah Hipps.

The Hippses said they felt vindicated by the jury and betrayed by Virginia Mason, where Sarah Hipps worked as an anesthesiologist at the time of her husband’s surgery. “I felt totally betrayed,” she said. “These were people I worked with for years.”

Read more: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/jury-virginia-mason-should-pay-couple-in-disfigured-penis-case/

[Dustlawyer]

1. In Texas they would get to keep only a max of $750,000 plus medical expenses and lost wages.

If the suit was only against one defendant the cap is $250,000 for pain, suffering, mental anguish and disfigurement. Two defendants $500,000, and max of three defendants $750,000.

There are many other roadblocks built in to protect doctors and hospitals at the expense of the patient/victim. Tort reform is moving towards individuals not being able to sue corporations and doctors. Generic drug manufacturers have immunity. Class actions are now restricted a great deal, it goes on and on.

If you live in Texas, our all Republican elected Supreme Court will not let a big plaintiff verdict stand. They look for an excuse to remand the case back to the trial court for a new trial.

Hey Republicans, they are taking your Freedoms! They are taking your rights, wake up!

[TexasTowelie]

2. You are preaching to the choir.

I was the tort reform statistical analyst at the Dept. of Insurance. I provided the data and much of the analysis to determine rate changes related to tort reform.

From a social perspective I do understand some need to have limits on damages. However, at the same time there is a transfer of burden from the insured parties that were involved in the incidents to socialize those losses to all taxpayers. Unfortunately I didn't see many actuaries that were concerned about the transfer of burden outside of the insurance sector into the social programs.

Finally, with tort reform the lawyers are afraid to take on medical liability suits because the rate of return isn't worth the risk. Larger medical claims can require up to four years to obtain a settlement and the expenses for plaintiff's attorneys are high because of the need for medical experts and specialists to review the documentation necessary to build a case. The cap limits in Texas are twenty years out of date and need to be doubled or tripled to correspond with the inflation rate in the medical professions and level the playing field.