Dan Ryan received a defense verdict in a case in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County in which the Plaintiff, the estate of a deceased patient, alleged that an Internist failed to diagnose and treat the patient’s lung cancer. The patient ultimately died from stage three lung cancer. The Plaintiff asserted that the Internist should have ordered follow-up studies as a result of abnormalities suggested on a July 1999 chest x-ray. According to Plaintiff’s expert, if the physician would have performed timely follow-up studies, the patient’s lymph node involvement would not have been as extensive and he would have had a better chance of prolonged survival.

On June 14, 1999, the patient, a 53-year-old male, presented to his Internist’s office after an illness and complained that he was light-headed, had cramping and diarrhea and had a temperature of 102 degrees, The patient denied any dyspnea on exertion or hemoptysis. The patient’s history was significant for cigarette smoking and interstitial lung infiltrates but indicated to the Internist that he had stopped smoking in 1995. The Internist had the impression that the patient had an upper respiratory infection that was probably viral in nature. He ordered a chest x-ray and blood work. The blood work was normal. The chest x-ray, performed on July 8, 1999, revealed a patchy infiltrate in the right lower lobe, which the Internist felt was consistent with the patient’s symptoms.

On July 20, 1999, the patient returned for a follow-up visit. He did not have any shortness of breath, sputum or cough. His weight was stable and his lungs were clear. At the next office visit on November 16, 1999, the patient complained of hemoptysis. A chest x-ray was immediately ordered, which revealed a right hilar mass with post-obstructive atelectasis and infiltrate, most suspicious for carcinoma. The Internist promptly referred his patient to a pulmonary specialist. A non-small cell carcinoma of the lungs was eventually diagnosed with positive lymph nodes. Despite treatment and due to the virulent nature of the tumor and the significant node involvement, the patient died less than one year later, in October of 2000.

After a six-day trial and 2 ½ days of jury deliberation, the jury returned a unanimous verdict finding that the Internist was not negligent in their treatment of his patient.

Heather Hansen obtained a defense verdict for an orthopedic surgeon in Philadelphia County. The plaintiff alleged that the orthopedic surgeon negligently opted to perform a bilateral total knee replacement despite alleged vascular compromise in the patient; and negligently ordered the use of a continuous passive motion (CPM) machine during the patient’s post-operative rehabilitation. The defense contended that the orthopedic surgeon appropriately performed the surgery as the patient was given pre-operative clearance and as the surgeon himself palpated pedal pulses pre-operatively and, therefore, detected no vascular compromise. The defense also contended that the post-operative rehabilitation order to utilize the CPM machine was appropriate and within the standard of care.

Following a five day trial, and after deliberating for a mere fifteen minutes, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defense.

Heather Hansen obtained a defense verdict for a urologist in Philadelphia County. The plaintiff alleged that the urologist was negligent in the performance of a vesicovaginal repair suffered by the plaintiff after a hysterectomy. They contended that the urologist negligently positioned the plaintiff for the surgery and thus caused femoral and obturator neuropathies. The defense contended that the positioning was proper and within the standard of care, and that this type of injury cannot occur absent negligence.

Following a ten day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the urologist as well as the co-defendant hospital and obstetrician-gynecologist.

Dan Ryan obtained a defense verdict for internist in Philadelphia County. Plaintiff’s husband died at the age of forty two as a result of his coronary artery disease (CAD). In her Complaint, Plaintiff alleged Mr. Ryan’s client (an Internist) failed to appreciate the significance of cardiac studies taken in the months and years leading up to the death and that he should have done more to decrease or eliminate some of the risk factors Plaintiff’s husband had for developing CAD, including smoking and poor diet. The defense maintained Plaintiff’s husband’s death was both unpredictable and unpreventable over the four day trial, and the jury agreed. After deliberating just over two hours, they found Mr. Ryan’s client was not negligent.

Dan Ryan obtained a defense verdict for an OB/GYN in Philadelphia County. The Plaintiff, who was pregnant with her first child, was diagnosed with fibroids. The fibroids did not complicate the pregnancy. After several hours of labor, the fetal heart rate decelerated and would not return to baseline. An emergency c-section was ordered. The Plaintiff and her husband initially refused the recommendation, but finally agreed twenty-five minutes later. A healthy baby was delivered via c-section, but because of the fibroids, uncontrollable bleeding was encountered. An emergency hysterectomy was performed. The defense maintained that the c-section was necessary to save the baby’s life and the hysterectomy was necessary to save the Plaintiff’s life. After the three week trial and a two hour deliberation, the jury agreed, and found that Mr. Ryan’s client was not negligent.