Page 18 - 2015_0429_NYLJTOPVERDICTS

2014
TOP VERDICTS NY
-Continued from p17
to have manufactured and/or distributed products that contained asbestos. He alleged that the defendants failed to provide warnings that disclosed the dangers that could have stemmed from exposure to their products’ asbestos.
Hackshaw died after the suits had been filed. His claim was continued by his estate.
Several defendants were dismissed; plaintiffs’ counsel discontinued the claims against others; and other defendants negotiated settlements. The matter ultimately proceeded to a trial against Crane.
During a deposition, Hackshaw claimed that his work included the use of an asbestos- laden Crane-manufactured product, Cranite Asbestos Sheet Gasketing Material, that allowed the creation of customized gaskets. He noted that the material had to be hammered into the desired form, and he claimed that the hammering caused the emission of visible clouds of asbestos.
Plaintiffs’ counsel claimed that Crane’s executives and managers knew that asbestos could not be safely inhaled, and they contended that the company’s products should have displayed warnings that disclosed the dangers that could have stemmed from exposure to asbestos.
Defense counsel contended that Sweberg could not prove that he handled any asbestos- containing product that was manufactured by Crane. They also claimed that Hackshaw and Sweberg did not use any insulation that was manufactured by Crane. They contended that other manufacturers’ asbestos-laden insulation was routinely applied to Crane- manufactured products. They also contended that Crane-manufactured gaskets contained encapsulated asbestos, which cannot be liberated or inhaled. They suggested that the men’s mesothelioma stemmed from their use of other manufacturers’ products.
INJURIES/DAMAGES During the late portion of 2012, Hackshaw learned that he was suffering mesothelioma. The disease ultimately claimed his life. He died in August 2013. Plaintiffs’ counsel claimed that Hackshaw’s suffering worsened during the final four months of Hackshaw’s life. They claimed that Hackshaw could not feed himself, that he remained bedbound and that his respiration was severely impaired.
Hackshaw’s estate sought recovery of damages for Hackshaw’s pain and suffering.
In mid-2012, Sweberg learned that he was suffering mesothelioma. Sweberg sought recovery of damages for past and future pain and suffering.
RESULT The jury found that Hackshaw and Sweberg were exposed to asbestos that was contained in products whose use was related to the use of Crane-manufactured products. The jury also found that Crane failed to provide warnings that disclosed the dangers that could have stemmed from exposure to asbestos.
The jury determined that Hackshaw’s damages totaled $10 million. Crane was assigned 20 percent of the liability, and the remaining liability was assigned to parties that were not involved in the trial. Thus, Hackshaw’s damages were reduced to $2 million.
The jury also determined that Sweberg’s damages totaled $15 million. Crane was assigned 9 percent of the liability, and the remaining liability was assigned to parties that were not involved in the trial. Thus, Sweberg’s damages were reduced to $1.35 million.
NUMBER NINE
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
Brain Injuries — Delayed Treatment
Doc didn’t timely address teen’s collapsed lung, suit alleged
AMOUNT $22,977,200
TYPE Verdict-Plaintiff
CASE Buri v. Mount Sinai Medical Center Inc. VENUE Queens County
JUDGE Jeffrey D. Lebowitz
DATE February 4, 2014
INJURY
TYPE(S) brain - brain damage, encephalopathy
pulmonary/respiratory - hypoxia
PLAINTIFF
ATTORNEY(S) Jonathan C. Reiter; Jonathan C. Reiter Law Firm, PLLC;
New York, NY
PLAINTIFF
EXPERT(S) John Himelfarb ; Radiology; Levittown, NY
L.D. Britt M.D.; General Surgery; Norfolk, VA
Debra Dwyer Ph.D; Economics; Stony Brook, NY
Daniel Adler M.D.; Pediatric Neurology; Englewood, NJ
Sanders Davis M.D.; Physical Medicine; Morristown, NJ Occupational, Environmental & Medical Toxicology; Flushing, NY
DEMAND $6,000,000 (total, for Carlos Buri, from all defendants) OFFER $1,000,000 (total, for Carlos Buri, from all defendants)
TRIAL
LENGTH 20 days
TRIAL
DELIBERATIONS 1 day
JURY
COMPOSITION 1 male/ 5 female
FACTS & ALLEGATIONS On May 29, 2009, plaintiff Carlos Buri, 16, experienced a sudden decrease of his blood’s oxygenation. Carlos, who was suffering pneumonia and septic shock, was being treated at The Mount Sinai Medical Center, in Manhattan. He was undergoing mechanical control of his ventilation, but his left lung was not emitting the sounds that typically accompany respiration. Carlos also displayed extreme agitation. A pediatrician, Dr. Joanne Hojsak, diagnosed a pneumothorax, which is the pleural cavity’s retention of air or gas. The condition caused a collapse of Carlos’ left lung.
Hojsak inserted a tube that inflated Carlos’ left lung, but Carlos’ heart stopped. Nineteen minutes passed before he could be resuscitated. Carlos’ father, Segundo Buri, claimed that Carlos sustained resultant hypoxia that caused severe damage of his brain.
Segundo Buri, acting individually and as Carlos’ parent and natural guardian, sued Hojsak, the hospital’s operator, Mount Sinai Medical Center Inc., and three other pediatricians who were believed to have treated Carlos, Dr. Karen Gluck, Dr. Linda Siegel and Dr. James Weisfeld-Adams. The plaintiffs alleged that the doctors failed to properly treat Carlos, that the doctors’ failures constituted malpractice and that the Mount Sinai Medical Center was vicariously liable for the doctors’ actions.
During the trial, plaintiffs’ counsel discontinued the claims against Gluck, Hojsak, Siegel and Weisfeld-Adams. The trial continued against the Mount Sinai Medical Center. The plaintiffs’ expert surgeon opined that Hojsak departed from an accepted standard of medical care. He contended that the doctor did not timely or properly address Carlos’ pneumothorax. The expert opined that the pneumothorax should have been resolved via immediate performance of a thoracostomy, which would have involved the insertion of a catheter that would have siphoned the air that had accumulated in Carlos’ pleural cavity. The expert opined that valuable time was lost while Hojsak needlessly adjusted a tube that was providing oxygen. The expert also claimed that Hojsak unnecessarily attempted to perform an X-ray of Carlos’ chest. The plaintiffs’ expert neurologist and expert radiologist
agreed that Carlos suffered resultant hypoxia that caused damage of his brain.
SELWYN A. HACKSHAW
IVAN SWEBERG
ACTUAL AWARD
$10,000,000 Personal Injury: Past Pain And Suffering
$10,000,000 Personal Injury: Past Pain And Suffering $5,000,000 Personal Injury: future pain and suffering (1.5 years)
$3,350,000
EDITOR’S COMMENT This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs’ counsel and Crane’s counsel. Additional information was gleaned from court documents. The remaining defendants’ counsel was not asked to contribute.
18 VerdictSearch’s Top New York Verdicts of 2014