Logan Logan & Watson, L.C.: Trial Results, Recent Projects and Reported Cases

Wyandotte County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff was a 45 year old male who was undergoing hip replacement surgery. He claimed that during the surgery he experienced an episode of Anesthesia Awareness as a result of inappropriate administration of anesthesia. Our client, an anesthesiologist, lowered levels of an inhaled anesthetic agent due to concerns with the plaintiff's vital signs during the surgery. Following the alleged event, the plaintiff became an outspoken advocate on the topic of Anesthesia Awareness, making frequent media appearances in local and national media, including appearances on Larry King Live, Anderson Cooper 360 and a feature story in the National Enquirer. The pre-trial settlement demand was for a non-negotiable payment that was withdrawn shortly before trial. In closing arguments, counsel for the plaintiff refused to make a specific demand for recovery, instead asking the jury for what it thought the average person on the street would take in exchange for undergoing the claimed horrific experience of being awake during a surgery and have the ability to feel each cut of the surgeon's scalpel without being able to even blink an eye or lift a finger to stop it. A defense verdict was returned after less than 35 minutes of deliberation.

Neosho County, Kansas. Plaintiff Verdict. The plaintiff's decedent was an 18 day old infant who had traveled from Maine where she was born to the Chanute, Kansas area. Our client, a family practitioner, was seeing the child for the first and only time as a follow up from an emergency room visit where a chest film had been reported by the ER physician as normal, which was reported to our client. Our client was unaware that an over read of the film showed pneumonia, and diagnosed a viral upper respiratory infection. Two days later the child died, and the cause of death disputed between the parties at trial. The total claim for damages pretrial was in excess of $500,000. Although the doctor was found by the jury to be at fault, the total verdict was limited to only the claimed medical expenses of approximately $31,000.

Johnson County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff was a 46 year old female who claimed she had suffered an anoxic brain injury related to a ruptured uterus diagnosed at the time of the C-section delivery of her child in December of 2000. The plaintiff claimed her ruptured uterus was due to the inappropriate administration of Pitocin during the induction of labor. The plaintiff asserted that she was unable to work because of an alleged "anoxic brain injury." She claimed damages for medical treatment, past and future lost wages, as well as pain and suffering. At trial plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $300,000. A verdict was returned in favor of all defendants.

Atchison County, Kansas. Directed Verdict for Defense. The plaintiff was a 81 year old female who saw our client, a neurologist, on several occasions between September 2005 and July 2006 for neurological evaluations and assessment of her cognitive impairment syndrome and early Alzheimer's dementia. Lab work performed on the plaintiff in September 2005 showed a mildly elevated sed rate. Additional lab work performed in October 2005 again showed a mildly elevated sed rate. Our client noted that these mildly elevated rates were suggestive of a nonspecific inflammatory process. This information was reported to a treating physician of the plaintiff and our client recommended they should be monitored and, if clinically indicated, followed up on. Subsequently, the plaintiff was seen by several other physicians and a dentist for complaints of a stiff neck, right jaw achiness and difficulty opening her jaw. In July 2006, the plaintiff was admitted to St. Luke's South for sudden blindness secondary to Giant Cell Arteritis. The plaintiff claimed damages at trial in excess of $1,000,000. At the close of plaintiff's evidence the Court granted a directed verdict in favor of our client, dismissing all counts against him.

Wyandotte County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff, a 63 year old male, underwent a left hemicolectomy to remove a cancerous tumor from his colon that was performed by our client, a general surgeon. Approximately seven days following the surgery, the plaintiff was diagnosed with a ureter injury which was subsequently repaired. The plaintiff claimed our client failed to recognize the ureter injury in a timely manner and claimed damages for pain and suffering, loss wages, and past and future medical expenses. Prior to trial a non-negotiable demand of $400,000 was submitted by the plaintiff. At trial plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $1,000,000. A verdict was returned in favor of the defendant.

Wyandotte County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff, a 40 year old male, underwent a total knee replacement surgery performed by our client, an orthopedic surgeon. Subsequently, the plaintiff alleged that our client and another physician had deviated from the standard of care by failing to timely administer the appropriate amount of pre-surgical antibiotics which ultimately led him to develop an infection in his knee. As a result of the alleged injury, the plaintiff claimed he was totally disabled and could not work. The defendant physicians testified that both the timing of the antibiotics and the amount given were correct. The defendant physicians further testified that the plaintiff did not contract an infection during the total knee replacement surgery. The total claim for damages at trial was in excess of $1,000,000. After less than 20 minutes of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant physicians.

Johnson County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff was a 56 year old female patient who had developed severe back pain and was subsequently diagnosed with a staphylococcus aureus septicemia. She was admitted to the hospital and placed on IV antibiotics to treat the staph infection. Our client, a neurosurgeon, diagnosed paraparesis and paraplegia in plaintiff's lower extremities and ordered a thoracic MRI to rule out a compression lesion to plaintiff's thoracic spine. The MRI was read as negative for a compressive lesion by a radiologist. Subsequently, a thoracic MRI scan was repeated and some elements of compression were visualized in the epidural space leading to a surgery to the affected area. Following surgery, the plaintiff claimed to have significant ongoing neurologic deficits involving her lower extremities. The plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $1 million. A verdict was returned in favor of all defendants.

Johnson County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff was the husband of a 43 year old female patient referred to our client, a general surgeon, due to an abnormal mammogram. The patient had right breast pain with no other complaints. Radiology revealed a left breast mass that was likely fibroadenoma and an intramammary lymph node on the right breast. A core biopsy was performed on the mass in the left breast and found benign. Patient was called with results. Two follow-up visits were scheduled, but the patient failed to appear for either. Eighteen months later a biopsy of the patient's right breast by subsequent physician revealed Grade III invasive ductal cancer with lymphovascular invasion. The patient expired late the following year. The plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $5 million. The verdict was returned after less than one hour of jury deliberation.

Wyandotte County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff, a married 64 year old father of three minor children, was hospitalized at a local hospital with presumptive infective endocarditis. Our client, a cardiologist, was called in as a consultant on the case for a four day period. Upon discharge from the hospital, plaintiff received IV antibiotic therapy through a home health service under the supervision of his primary care physician and an infectious disease specialist. Plaintiff missed 11 days of an antibiotic previously prescribed and was admitted to a tertiary care center. In spite of the care provided, the plaintiff suffered an embolic stroke and was left permanently disabled and confined to a wheelchair. Plaintiff claimed our client did not order the correct cardiologic related studies, did not request the appropriate antibiotics for treatment, allowed plaintiff to be discharged from the hospital prematurely and failed to seek a surgical consult during the hospitalization. The plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $8 million. The verdict was returned after 3 hours of jury deliberation.

Johnson County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff, an eight year old girl, was one of two identical twins attended to by our OB/GYN client before and during their births. Following the birth of the first twin, plaintiff presented in footling breech position and was ultimately delivered by C-section. Prior to delivery, the infant suffered a prolapsed cord that plaintiff claimed resulted in cerebral palsy, maladaptive disorders, mild retardation and seizures. Plaintiff claimed that had our client more closely overseen the delivery he would have been able to perform an earlier C-section and avoided the injury to the infant. Defendant claimed Plaintiff suffered gestational birth defects and that her alleged complications were not as a result of our client's care and treatment. The plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $8 million. The verdict was returned after less than 1 hour of jury deliberation.

Jackson County, Missouri. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff, a 32 year old female, presented to our OB/GYN client with complaints of pelvic pain. A laparoscopy was performed and the patient was diagnosed with endometriosis. Lupron was given without success, and subsequently the patient opted for a total vaginal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy performed by our client. Post-operatively the plaintiff complained of an alleged injury to the pudendal nerve during the hysterectomy allegedly caused by the use of a weighted speculum and the application of excessive traction. After deliberating less than fifty minutes the jury found by unanimous verdict that our client did not deviate from the standard of care and caused no injury to the plaintiff.

Clay County, Missouri. Defense Verdict. The female plaintiff underwent an abdominoplasty and liposuction performed by our client, a plastic surgeon. Plaintiff required postoperative hospitalization because she was slow to recover after surgery and developed pulmonary issues. She was dismissed after a brief stay and later underwent a minor revision of her abdominoplasty scar. The plaintiff claimed that our client had caused her to develop pulmonary edema through the administration of excessive fluids and that he had failed to give her the aesthetic results she had hoped to obtain. The jury in the first trial returned a defense verdict that was later overturned by the court. A second trial was conducted and another defense verdict was returned for our client. This verdict came less than an hour after the case was submitted to the jury.

Johnson County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. Our client, a neurologist, consulted with this female plaintiff in the hospital for headaches, nausea, vomiting and dehydration. A lumbar puncture and MRI were ordered and a possible venous sinus thrombosis was suspected. After all the tests came back negative the patient was discharged by her admitting physician. The plaintiff's symptoms continued and she was referred to another neurologist for consultation. This neurologist ordered an MRV which was suspicious for a partial thrombosis. She was admitted to the hospital where an angiogram confirmed a thrombosis of the transverse sigmoid sinus. The plaintiff recovered and brought an action that alleged that our client should have ordered an MRV when he first saw the patient in the hospital. Plaintiff alleged a sensory hearing loss and fear of having a future stroke. After deliberating three hours, the jury returned with a verdict in favor of our client.

Wyandotte County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. The plaintiff, a 31 year old female, underwent gastric bypass surgery performed by our client, a general surgeon. The plaintiff developed a post-operative leak at the surgical site that required a second surgical repair. Plaintiff claimed that our client's initial surgery was improperly performed and the wrong size of surgical staple was utilized. A verdict was returned in favor of our client.

Franklin County, Kansas. Defense Verdict. This matter involved the stillbirth of a full term infant as a result of a uterine rupture during an attempted vaginal birth after a previous cesarean section ("VBAC"). Plaintiffs alleged that our client, a family practice physician, failed to adhere to the applicable standard of care in that he did not adequately inform the patient of the risks associated with VBAC delivery, failed to perform a C-Section on the plaintiff in a timely manner and that Oxytocin was inappropriately used on this patient. A verdict was returned in favor of our client and he was found to have met the applicable standard of care.

Members of the firm have recently completed the following projects:

1. Boulanger v. Pol, 258 Kan. 289, 900 P.2d 823, Kan., Aug 18, 1995

Voluntary mental patient's uncle brought action against intermediate care facility and psychiatrist who treated patient at facility to recover for injuries sustained when patient shot uncle after patient's release from facility. The Chautauqua District Court, Richard A. Medley, J., granted summary judgment for psychiatrist and facility, and uncle appealed. Upon transfer of case, the Supreme Court, Holmes, C.J., held that: (1) cause of action in favor of third party for negligent release of involuntary mental patient did not extend to voluntary patients; (2) psychiatrist had no duty to warn where uncle was already aware of danger posed by patient; and (3) no special relationship existed under circumstances of case such that psychiatrist had duty to warn or to involuntarily commit patient.
Affirmed.

CASE OF FIRST IMPRESSION; APPLICABILITY OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO PROBATE CODE, WILL CONTESTS

2. Matter of Estate of Brodbeck, 22 Kan.App.2d 229, 915 P.2d 145, Kan.App., Apr 19, 1996

Testator's niece brought will contest, alleging undue influence by testator's apartment manager and hairdresser, the proponents of the will. The District Court, Johnson County, Sam K. Bruner, J., granted summary judgment for proponents. Niece appealed. The Court of Appeals, Pierron, J., held that: (1) summary judgment is available in will contests based on undue influence; (2) despite confidential relationship, manager and hairdresser did not unduly influence testator in executing will; (3) testator's belief that niece no longer loved her was not insane delusion; and (4) allowing proponents of will to draft summary judgment journal entry which judge signed was proper.
Affirmed.

3. Injured Workers of Kansas v. Franklin, 262 Kan. 840, 942 P.2d 591, Kan. Jul 18, 1997

In first case, various individuals, groups, and labor organizations filed a petition for declaratory judgment, seeking declaration that 1993 amendments to the Workers Compensation Act were unconstitutional and void. The District Court, Shawnee County, Charles E. Andrews, Jr., granted defendants' motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs filed notice of appeal with the Court of Appeals, and motion to transfer case to the Supreme Court which was granted. In second case, claimant filed application for review with the Workers Compensation Board, challenging award for shoulder injury, and the constitutionality of statutory amendment which classifies shoulder injuries as scheduled injuries. The Board ruled that it lacked authority to consider constitutionality of amendment, and affirmed award. Claimant appealed to the Court of Appeals and filed motion to consolidate his case with declaratory judgment case, which was granted. The Supreme Court, Abbott, J., held that: (1) amended notice of claim statute pursuant to which workers' compensation claimants must notify employer of injury within ten days of occurrence of injury, or within 75 days at the most, does not violate equal protection or Due Process Clause of the Kansas Constitution; (2) amendment which classifies shoulder injury as a scheduled injury instead of as a whole body injury, does not violate equal protection or Due Process Clause of the Kansas Constitution; (3) amendment requiring offset of social security and private pension retirement benefits against workers' compensation benefits does not violate equal protection; (4) amendment setting forth graduated contingency fee rates for attorneys does not interfere with Supreme Court's inherent power to regulate the practice of law or unconstitutionally violate separation of powers doctrine; and (5) amendment setting forth graduated contingency fee rates does not violate equal protection or due process.
Affirmed.

4. P.W.P. v. L.S., 266 Kan. 417, 969 P.2d 896, Kan., Dec 18, 1998

Patient brought action against therapist and mental health center, seeking recovery for emotional injures she sustained as result of sexual relationship with therapist. The District Court, Johnson County, Steve Leben, J., entered judgment for therapist and mental health center, and patient appealed. The Supreme Court, Larson, J., held that: (1) patient's claims were reasonably ascertainable more than two years prior to initiation of lawsuit; (2) transference phenomenon did not toll statute of limitations with respect to patient's claim; and (3) continuing patient-therapist relationship did not toll statute of limitations.
Affirmed.

5. Kansas Pipeline Partnership v. State Corp. Com'n of State of Kan., 22 Kan.App.2d 410, 916 P.2d 76, Kan.App., May 17, 1996

Natural gas pipeline submitted its natural gas sales and transportation contracts with natural gas local distribution company (LDC) to Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC) for approval. Commission issued order denying pipeline's contention that contracts became deemed approved by operation of law because Commission failed to make decision within regulatory and statutory time limits. Pipeline sought judicial review. The Court of Appeals, Elliott, P.J., held that: (1) Commission order constituted "final agency action" subject to judicial review, and (2) contracts and related requests were deemed approved by operation of law due to Commission's failure to finally act within 240 days of pipeline's application, despite KCC's issuance of stay and contention that Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) order asserting jurisdiction over pipeline was substantial alteration of facts so as to constitute "amendment" within exception to time limit.
Reversed.

6. Western Resources, Inc. v. State Corp. Com'n of State of Kan., 23 Kan.App.2d 664, 937 P.2d 964, Kan.App., Mar 19, 1997

Natural gas pipeline and natural gas local distribution company (LDC) sought approval of natural gas sales and transportation contracts between those parties before Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC). Commission consolidated dockets and issued order denying pipeline's contention that contracts became deemed approved by operation of law because Commission failed to make decision within regulatory and statutory time limits. Pipeline sought judicial review. The Court of Appeals, 22 Kan.App.2d 410, 916 P.2d 76, reversed. On remand, Commission dismissed company's application, claiming that dockets were consolidated only for purpose of common record. Company appealed. The Court of Appeals, Elliott, J., held that: (1) Commission improperly dismissed company's application for approval of gas sales and transportation contracts following prior appeal, and (2) it would not reconsider its decision in prior appeal that it had jurisdiction of consolidated Commission dockets of pipeline and company.
Reversed and remanded with directions.

7. Cedar Creek Properties, Inc. v. Board of County Com'rs of Johnson County, 249 Kan. 149, 815 P.2d 492, Kan., Jul 12, 1991

Owners of land adjoining property to be annexed to city as part of "island" annexation sought review of approval of annexation by board of county commissioners. The Johnson District Court, Phillip L. Woodworth, J., dismissed, and owners appealed. The Court of Appeals, 13 Kan.App.2d 734, 779 P.2d 463, affirmed, and owners petitioned for review. The Supreme Court, 246 Kan. 412, 789 P.2d 1170, reversed and remanded, determining that owners had standing to seek review of decision of board of county commissioners. On remand, the District Court, Johnson County, Phillip L. Woodworth, J., determined that use to be made of land could not be challenged in annexation proceeding and affirmed county board decision to allow annexation. On appeal following remand, the Supreme Court, Abbott, J., held that board was required to consider use of which land subject to island annexation would be put and determining whether proposed annexation would hinder proper development of land and in whether to approve annexation.
Reversed and remanded with directions.

8. Heany v. Nibbelink, 23 Kan.App.2d 583, 932 P.2d 1046, Kan.App., Feb 28, 1997

Patient brought medical malpractice action against physician, alleging that negligent treatment caused postpartum bleeding. The District Court, Wyandotte County, Bill D. Robinson, Jr., J., granted summary judgment in favor of physician. Patient appealed. The Court of Appeals, Marquardt, P.J., held that: (1) patient failed to present expert testimony as to standard of care and as to whether physician's conduct fell below standard, as required to maintain action, and (2) attorney work product doctrine rendered insurer's claim file on physician immune from discovery.
Affirmed.

9. Kelley v. Barnett, 23 Kan.App.2d 564, 932 P.2d 471, Kan.App., Feb 28, 1997

Administrator of estate of deceased patient, who had suffered stroke which left her permanently paralyzed six months after undergoing abdominal surgery and who had died 11 months later, brought medical malpractice and wrongful death actions against surgeons who had treated patient. Surgeons moved for summary judgment, and the Johnson District Court, Lawrence E. Sheppard, J., granted motion. Plaintiffs appealed, and the Court of Appeals, Robert J. Schmisseur, District Judge, assigned, held that injury to patient was reasonably ascertainable by patient and her family, beginning operation of statute of limitations, at time patient suffered stroke.
Affirmed.

10. Anderson v. Collier, 92 P.3d 1147 (Table), Kan.App.,2004. Jul 09, 2004

Insulin dependent diabetic, who lost a foot in a work related injury, brought negligence action against physician, hospital and prosthesis designer for alleged negligent prescription and fitting of artificial leg resulting in further amputation of the limb. Defendants moved for summary judgment, and the Wyandotte County District Court, George A. Groneman, granted motions. Plaintiff appealed the granting of summary judgment to all the defendants based upon the statute of limitations and to the University of Kansas Hospital Authority (KUHA) on the additional grounds that KUHA owed no duty to Anderson. The Court of Appeals, C. Fred Lorentz, District Judge, assigned, held that the statute of limitations began to run on the date Anderson discovered his wound was caused by a faulty prosthesis and that accordingly the action was time barred.
Affirmed.

11. Frasher v. Life Investors Ins. Co. of America, 14 Kan.App.2d 583, 796 P.2d 1069, Kan.App. Jul 27, 1990

Estate of buyer of vehicle brought suit for benefits under credit life policy buyer had obtained through Kansas car dealer during purchase of vehicle. The Johnson District Court, Janice D. Russell, J., granted summary judgment to insurer, and administrator of estate appealed. The Court of Appeals, Brazil, P.J., held that: (1) "insured" in credit life policy referred to buyer rather than dealer, and thus, because buyer resided in Missouri, Missouri law governed construction of policy, and (2) policy was "issued" to buyer, and thus Missouri statute barring suicide as defense to nonpayment of life benefits applied, and insurer was required to pay benefits following buyer's suicide, notwithstanding policy's suicide exclusion.
Reversed and remanded.

12. City of Leawood v. City of Overland Park, 245 Kan. 283, 777 P.2d 830, Kan. Jul 14, 1989

Municipality filed petition for declaratory judgment seeking to have annexation ordinances of neighboring city declared invalid, thereby giving municipality jurisdiction over disputed land. Neighboring municipality moved for summary judgment. The District Court, Johnson County, Larry McClain, J., entered judgment, and appeal and cross appeal were taken. On transfer of case from Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, Herd, J., held that annexation of multiple contiguous tracts under heading and one ordinance was proper.
Affirmed.