Financial Security Case Studies
Doctor and Hospital Sued For Wrongful Death
Expert Witness Testimony Significantly Influences Favorable Medical
Malpractice Case Outcome
A patient with a heart ailment was transported to a hospital where an
angiogram was performed. The patient later had a stint inserted into an
artery, along with a second angiogram, but died shortly thereafter. A
third angiogram was performed immediately after the patient's death.
Images of the angiogram procedures were purportedly stored on computer
hard drives. The day following the patient's death, hospital staff were
able to locate images for the first and third angiograms but could not
find any images of the second procedure. The hospital and doctor were sued
for medical malpractice and wrongful death. The plaintiffs also claimed
the defendants had deliberately deleted the images of the second angiogram
that allegedly proved the wrongful death claim.
NTI was engaged by the doctor's insurance company to locate images of
the second angiogram on the computer hard drive. No evidence could be
found that the second angiogram images had ever been stored on the
computers, nor that the images had been deleted. Through inquiries of
hospital staff, we learned that the system was prone to problems and
periodically "crashed". NTI requested the hospital perform a test case on
the system, and it was observed that the system malfunctioned; in the test
case, no images were recorded. Subsequently, the hospital replaced this
system with a new system due to the periodic "crashes" that occurred.
The NTI examiner testified at the jury trial that system "crashes" may
have caused the images to not be stored on the computer hard drives and
that he had personally observed the system "crashing". The plaintiff's
attorneys countered that the manufacturer examined the system the day
after the patient's death and could not find any problems. NTI's examiner
countered that the system had been replaced by the hospital because of
system malfunctions. He further explained that because the system was
functioning normally on the day the manufacturer examined the system did
not mean that it was functioning on the day of the second angiogram
procedure.
The best outcome that the insurance company expected was elimination of
any penalties due to deliberate deletion of the images. The jury ruled
that no monetary damages would have to be paid to the plaintiffs. The
attorney for the insurance company later stated that "Your investigation
and testimony played a significant role in our presentation of the case to
the jury...all of the feedback from the jurors has been extremely positive
toward you and your testimony."
« Previous |
Next
» | 
