Back to Webinars Schedule
Charles M. RittgersLindsay LawrenceMatt Nakajima

Charles M. Rittgers · Lindsay Lawrence · Matt Nakajima

How to Win 7 Figure Verdicts on Difficult Medical Malpractice Cases

TLU Icon January 17, 2024 6:30 PM||TLU n Demand

Register NowZoom Icon

On February 16, 2023, Lindsay Lawrence and Charlie Rittgers obtained a $1 million-dollar non-economic pain and suffering verdict in Kenton County, Kentucky. On September 9, 2021, Plaintiff went to have a routine colonoscopy. Prior to the colonoscopy Plaintiff had complaints of hand pain where her IV was inserted. Plaintiff was a type 2 diabetic and had a life-threatening drop in her blood sugar prior to the colonoscopy. She was administered D50 – a drug to help increase her blood sugar. Plaintiff’s blood sugar returned to normal, and she went on that day to have her routine colonoscopy. She continued to have complaints of pain in her hand where the nurse had started her IV line and after the administration of D50 had worsening pain which she reported to the CRNA. Plaintiff was discharged from the gastroenterology center shortly after her colonoscopy. As a result of the IV being inserted incorrectly and Plaintiff being administered D50, the D50 leaked out into Plaintiff’s surrounding tissues in her hand and Plaintiff suffered permanent and disabling injuries that required emergency surgery to save her hand.

This case dealt with the following issues:

(1) There was no documentation of Plaintiff having pain or any issues with her IV line in the gastroenterology center records.

(2) Plaintiff’s injuries were permanent and despite requests from numerous experts, there were no future medical care needs required.

(3) There was evidence that Plaintiff had prior injuries to her hand that was injured and had numbness and tingling in her hand prior to her colonoscopy as a result of being a type 2 diabetic.

(4) Plaintiff’s expert witnesses – an anesthesiologist and nursing expert disagreed about what the standard of care required.

(5) Plaintiff’s nursing expert was unable to testify live so a trial deposition was taken and played at trial.

(6) There were two nurses on the jury – one retired and one currently practicing.

(7) Plaintiff put on their case in chief in less than a week.

(8) The Defense called several experts to testify that this was a known complication of administering D50 and Defendants were trying to save Plaintiff’s life.

(9) Defense experts were all caught in deception on cross-examination

(10) Defense argued throughout the case if the D50 was not administered that Plaintiff would be filing suit for a wrongful death claim.

(11) Defense never made an offer until the jury was about to come back with a verdict agreeing to a high-low that was placed on the Court’s record.

The jury came back with a verdict in Plaintiff’s favor, awarding $1,000,000 for non-economic damages for pain and suffering in an extremely conservative jurisdiction. The defense went from a zero offer to then having to pay the full policy limits available on the case.

If you can't attend Live, Watch On Demand