NEGLIGENCE

34. Defendants, directly and through their actual and apparent agents, servants and employees, are guilty of the following acts of omission, each of the acts alone or in combination were the proximate cause of _________________’s severe and permanent neurological impairment and damages resulting therefrom. Specifically, Defendant _________________’s, negligent acts are as follows: Read the rest of this entry »

15. _________________ was then notified of the variables at 1343. The nurses administered oxygen and repositioned _________________ on her left side apparently in an effort to improve the tracing.

16. Nonetheless, the variable decelerations reoccurred until 1507 when _________________ labor had progressed to 9cm and zero station. Read the rest of this entry »

CAUSE NO.

_________________ and * IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

____________________

Individually, and as next friends of * LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS

_________________, a minor child

* 99^th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Plaintiffs

*

v.

*

_________________

*

and

*

_________________

and

_________________

d/b/a __________________

_______________________ *

Defendants *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * Read the rest of this entry »

DAMAGES

29. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ negligence, directly and through its actual and apparent agents, servants and employees, Plaintiffs have suffered serious, severe, and permanent damage. ___________ has experienced physical pain, mental anguish, physical impairment, physical disfigurement and will, in reasonable probability, suffer from the same in the future. Read the rest of this entry »

15. Upon information and belief, initially, Twin B (Baby ____), demonstrated a few variable decelerations on the fetal heart monitor. Thereafter, the tracing was non reassuring with recurrent decelerations, decreased variability and tachycardia which the nurses apparently did not recognize.

16. Despite the medications, Ms. ___________ continued to contract every 3-4 minutes. Read the rest of this entry »

CAUSE NO. ________

____________ and * IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

___________

Individually, and as next friends of *

___________, a minor child

* ________ COUNTY, TEXAS

Plaintiffs

*

v.

* JUDICIAL DISTRICT ____

*

_____________

*

*

Defendants

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED PETITION

COME NOW Plaintiffs, ___________ and ___________, Individually, and as next friends of ___________, a minor child, herein referred to as Plaintiffs, complaining of __________________and__________________ Defendants, and file this Amended Petition under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 190.4 (Level 3), and for cause of action would respectfully show the Court as follows: Read the rest of this entry »

28. _________________’ Apgar scores were 2, 4, and 6 at 1, 5, and 10 minutes respectively (a zero to ten scale of fetal well being). He was acidotic at birth, developed seizures, and required a gastostomy tube for feeding. _________________ suffered an anoxic injury shortly before birth as a result of the delay in timely accomplishing his delivery.

29. The damages and injuries to Plaintiff _________________ were directly caused or were directly contributed to be caused as a result of the carelessness and negligence, faults, and omission of Defendant _________________, in one, more, or all of the following particulars, to wit:

(a) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ pre-eclampsia;

(b) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ elevated blood pressure;

(c) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate antenatal testing on Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(d) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly monitor Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(e) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely biophysical profile;

(f) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and adequately respond to the abnormal findings observed on January 30, 2005;

(g) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and appropriately delivery _________________;

(h) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely cesarean section;

(i) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to accurately and adequately respond to abnormalities in the fetal heart tracings;

(j) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate fetal monitoring;

(k) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform and measure up to the requisite standard of due care and skill required and observed by licensed physicians and in further particulars presently unknown to Plaintiffs, but which is verily believed and alleged will be disclosed upon proper discovery procedures in the course of this litigation.

30. The damages and injuries to Plaintiff _________________ were directly caused or were directly contributed to be caused as a result of the carelessness and negligence, faults, and omission of Defendant _________________, in one, more, or all of the following particulars, to wit:

(a) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ pre-eclampsia;

(b) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ elevated blood pressure;

(c) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate antenatal testing on Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(d) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly monitor Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(e) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely biophysical profile;

(f) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and adequately respond to the abnormal findings observed on January 30, 2005;

(g) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and appropriately delivery _________________;

(h) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely caesarean section;

(i) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to accurately and adequately respond to abnormalities in the fetal heart tracings;

(j) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate fetal monitoring;

(k) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform and measure up to the requisite standard of due care and skill required and observed by licensed physicians and in further particulars presently unknown to Plaintiffs, but which is verily believed and alleged will be disclosed upon proper discovery procedures in the course of this litigation.

31. The damages and injuries to Plaintiff _________________ were directly caused or were directly contributed to be caused as a result of the carelessness and negligence, faults, and omission of Defendant _________________, in one, more, or all of the following particulars, to wit:

(a) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ pre-eclampsia;

(b) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ elevated blood pressure;

(c) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate antenatal testing on Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(d) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly monitor Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(e) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely biophysical profile;

(f) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and adequately respond to the abnormal findings observed on January 30, 2005;

(g) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and appropriately delivery _________________;

(h) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely caesarean section;

(i) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to accurately and adequately respond to abnormalities in the fetal heart tracings;

(j) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate fetal monitoring;

(k) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform and measure up to the requisite standard of due care and skill required and observed by licensed physicians and in further particulars presently unknown to Plaintiffs, but which is verily believed and alleged will be disclosed upon proper discovery procedures in the course of this litigation.

32. The damages and injuries to Plaintiff _________________ were directly caused or were directly contributed to be caused as a result of the carelessness and negligence, faults, and omission of Defendant _________________, in one, more, or all of the following particulars, to wit:

(a) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ pre-eclampsia;

(b) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly manage Mrs. _________________’ elevated blood pressure;

(c) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate antenatal testing on Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(d) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to properly monitor Mrs. _________________ and her unborn child;

(e) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely biophysical profile;

(f) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and adequately respond to the abnormal findings observed on January 30, 2005;

(g) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to timely and appropriately delivery _________________;

(h) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform a timely caesarean section;

(i) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to accurately and adequately respond to abnormalities in the fetal heart tracings;

(j) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform adequate fetal monitoring;

(k) Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to perform and measure up to the requisite standard of due care and skill required and observed by licensed physicians and in further particulars presently unknown to Plaintiffs, but which is verily believed and alleged will be disclosed upon proper discovery procedures in the course of this litigation.

COUNT I

COME NOW _________________ and _________________, parents and next friends of Plaintiff _________________, and state and aver as follows:

33. Plaintiffs reassert and reallege paragraphs 1 through 32 above as fully set forth herein.

34. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence and carelessness of one, more or all of Defendants as stated herein, Plaintiff _________________ is permanently brain damaged and will forever need rehabilitation, therapies, nursing, attendant and other care, and substantial amounts of future medical care from age 18 onward.

35. Plaintiff _________________ has incurred substantial pain and suffering in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

36. Plaintiff _________________ has lost enjoyment of life in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

37. Plaintiff _________________ will lose a lifetime’s worth of wages due to his brain damage and incapacity.

WHEREFORE, _________________ and _________________, as parents and next friends of Plaintiff _________________, request judgment against Defendants, and each of them jointly and severally, in such sums as will reasonably and fairly compensate _________________ for his damages incurred, with his costs incurred herein, in excess of Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), and for such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

COUNT II

COME NOW, Plaintiffs _________________ and _________________, Individually, and state and aver as follows:

38. Plaintiffs _________________ and _________________ were at all times concerned herein the guardians and parents of _________________.

39. Plaintiffs reassert and reallege paragraphs 1 through 37 above as fully set forth herein.

40. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of one, more or all of Defendants as aforesaid, Plaintiffs have lost consortium, companionship, and services of their child, _________________, in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

41. As a direct and proximate result of the brain damage of their son, Plaintiffs _________________ and _________________ are responsible from birth up and until age 18 for the medical bills for physicians, hospitals, therapies, nursing and attendant care, and other medical bills in the past, and will continue to do so until their son’s 18^th birthday.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs _________________ and _________________, Individually, request judgment against Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally, in such sum which will reasonably and fairly compensate them for their damages incurred, with their costs incurred herein, in excess of Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), and for such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

BLEY & PFEIFFER, P.C.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BOONE COUNTY

STATE OF MISSOURI

_________________ and _________________, *

as parents and Next Friends of _________________

_________________, a minor, and _________________ *

_________________, Individually, and _________________

_________________, Individually, *

*

Plaintiffs

*

v.

*

_________________

Serve: _________________ *

_________________

Columbia, MO 65201

*

and

*

_________________

Serve: _________________ *

_________________

Columbia, MO 65201 *

and *

_________________ *

Serve: _________________

_________________ *

Columbia, MO 65201

*

and

*

_________________

Serve: _________________ *

_________________

Columbia, MO 65201 *

Defendants *

* * * * * * * * * * * *

PETITION FOR DAMAGES

COME NOW Plaintiffs, by and through their counsel, and for their cause of action against Defendants allege as follows:

1. Plaintiffs _________________ and _________________, Missouri residents, bring this cause of action individually and as next friends of their son, _________________, a minor. _________________ and _________________ were at all times concerned herein the parents and natural guardians of their son, _________________.

2. Defendants _________________, _________________, _________________, and _________________, are physicians licensed to practice medicine in the State of Missouri and whose primary place of business is within the confines of Boone County, Missouri.

3. Venue and jurisdiction are proper in this Court pursuant to RSMo §§508.010.6 and 538.232, as this action arises from negligent conduct occurring in Columbia, Boone County, Missouri.

4. At all times concerned herein, Defendant _________________ held himself out to the public in general and to _________________ in particular as being an able and skilled obstetrician possessing the same or higher level of skill and training as other members of his profession and that he was well able to render proper and adequate obstetrical care and treatment to _________________ and the baby within her.

5. At all times concerned herein, Defendant _________________ held herself out to the public in general and to _________________ in particular as being an able and skilled obstetrician possessing the same or higher level of skill and training as other members of her profession and that she was well able to render proper and adequate obstetrical care and treatment to _________________ and the baby within her.

6. At all times concerned herein, Defendant _________________ held herself out to the public in general and to _________________ in particular as being an able and skilled obstetrician possessing the same or higher level of skill and training as other members of her profession and that she was well able to render proper and adequate obstetrical care and treatment to _________________ and the baby within her.

7. At all times concerned herein, Defendant _________________ held himself out to the public in general and to _________________ in particular as being an able and skilled obstetrician possessing the same or higher level of skill and training as other members of his profession and that he was well able to render proper and adequate obstetrical care and treatment to _________________ and the baby within her.

8. In 2004, Plaintiff _________________ became pregnant. She began receiving prenatal care on September 15, 2004, at approximately 14 weeks gestation. Her estimated due date was March 16, 2005.

9. During her prenatal course, Mrs. _________________ was followed regularly and she developed an elevation in her blood pressure.

10. From December 29, 2004, through January 1, 2005, Plaintiff _________________ was admitted and evaluated at _________ Medical Center for pregnancy induced hypertension. She was discharged from the hospital on restricted activity with outpatient surveillance.

11. Mrs. _________________’ elevated blood pressure persisted and she was readmitted to __________ Medical Center on January 27, 2005, due to pre-eclampsia. In the hospital, as a result of a worsening clinical course, Plaintiff _________________ was started on magnesium sulfate (to prevent seizures) and was then transferred to _________________ on the afternoon of January 28, 2005.

12. Plaintiff _________________ was admitted to _________________ at approximately 6:00 p.m. on January 28, 2005. Upon admission, the plan of care was for observation, serial blood pressure monitoring, fetal monitoring, and possible induction of labor, if the criteria for severe pre-eclampsia was met. She was at approximately 33 3/7 weeks gestation.

13. At _________________, initial fetal heart rate monitoring was reassuring with the fetal heart rate in the 120’s and reactive. Fetal movement was also noted which is a reassuring sign.

14. On January 29, 2005, Mrs. _________________ remained hospitalized at _________________ and was periodically monitored for blood pressure and fetal heart rate. The baby’s heart rate remained reassuring throughout January 29, 2005. Mrs. _________________’ blood pressure fluctuated, but remained elevated.

15. On the morning of January 30, 2005, Plaintiff _________________ was transferred to the antepartum service by Defendant Dr. _________________. Defendant, Dr. _________________ and her attending, Defendant Dr. _________________, ordered twice a day non-stress tests (analysis of the fetal monitor strip for heart rate accelerations) and monitoring of vital signs every four hours.

16. The non-stress test performed from approximately 9:49 through 10:13 a.m. on January 30, 2005, was interpreted as “non-reactive” which is a concerning finding. This study, upon information and belief, was reviewed and interpreted by Defendant Dr. _________________ and Defendant Dr. _________________.

17. Plaintiff Mrs. _________________’ blood pressure, already elevated, was noted to be increased further at about 11:50 a.m. on January 30^th to 155/97.

18. Despite the precarious situation of mother and unborn child, no fetal monitoring was performed from the conclusion of the abnormal non-stress test around 10:15 a.m. until the performance of a repeat non-stress test from approximately 6:50 p.m. through 7:30 p.m. on January 30, 2005.

19. Throughout the day of January 30, 2005, Plaintiff _________________ and her unborn child also were also under the care of Defendant _________________ and Defendant Dr. _________________.

20. Blood pressure measurements at 2:00 p.m. (187/105) and 3:00 p.m. (185/107) on January 30^th were highly elevated and should have been very concerning. Elevated blood pressure is a known cause of placental abruption.

21. Dr. _________________ and _________________ reviewed and interpreted the second non-stress test performed beginning at 6:50 p.m. This test was also interpreted as non-reactive.

22. Other testing performed and reviewed by Defendant _________________ and Defendant Dr. _________________ at the time of the second non-stress test around 7:00 p.m. on January 30, 2005, was likewise very worrisome. A contraction stress test was also abnormal and revealed decelerations with most contractions. Further, a biophysical profile resulted in the ominous score of 2/10. (A biophysical profile is a test incorporating the results of the non-stress test with observations from an ultrasound exam).

23. At approximately 8:00 p.m., Mrs. _________________ was brought to labor and delivery from the antepartum service and evaluated by Dr. _________________. A vaginal exam revealed Mrs. _________________ to be only 1 centimeter dilated. Mrs. _________________’s blood pressure remained severely elevated.

24. At 8:30 p.m. on January 30^th, Defendant Dr. _________________ planned to proceed with a caesarean section. Subsequently, however, after consultation with Defendant _________________, the plan was changed to perform a rupture of membranes, and to do fetal monitoring, followed by a c-section, if there was fetal intolerance.

25. Fetal monitoring was reinstituted at approximately 9:10 p.m. At and after approximately 9:50 p.m., the fetal heart rate tracings are not interpretable.

26. After an ultrasound revealed no fetal heart rate, Mrs. _________________ was sent to the operating room at 10:28 p.m. for an emergent c-section.

27. _________________ was delivered by c-section by Defendant _________________ and Defendant Dr. _________________ at 10:33 p.m. on January 30, 2005. At the time of delivery, predictably, after having a prolonged period of elevated blood pressure, it was noted that a placental abruption had occurred (a separation of the placenta from the uterus), depriving the unborn child of necessary blood and oxygen.

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

Fayette Circuit Court

Civil Action No.:

Division No.:

___________, a minor,

by his mother and next friend

___________

Plaintiff

v.

_________________

SERVE ON: Registered Agent

and

________________

SERVE ON: Registered Agent

Defendants

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMPLAINT AND ELECTION FOR JURY TRIAL

___________, a minor by his mother and next friend ___________, Plaintiff, by and through his attorneys,sue Defendants___________________________, and in support state as follows: Read the rest of this entry »