Group Blawg

Fresh Insight into Popular Legal Topics

You are here: Home / Archives for Mike Nason

Mike Nason

Why is Summer the Most Common Season for Divorce?

by Leave a Comment

Summer: the season of watermelons, long days at the beach, fun family trips, and something unexpected—divorce. Surprisingly, new research out of Washington state claims that summer is the most common season for divorce. By analyzing annual trends, experts have come to understand what makes people more likely

What the Research Says

A study conducted by University of Washington sociologists looked at divorce trends in Washington state, finding that divorce filings increased substantially in both August and March. These dates are in line with school breaks and holidays. During this time, couples often spend more time together, which often highlights issues within the marriage and leaves both spouses thinking about their options. Family vacations and holiday trips, which take families out of their school and work routines, often make it all too easy for unhappy spouses to notice and reflect on their partner’s shortcomings.

How to Prepare for Divorce

While spring and summer breaks may be a significant source of stress for those in unhappy marriages, it’s important to take your time, consider your options, and prepare for the next step—whether or not that next step is divorce. Waiting until a marriage has reached the point of no return can lead to rash decisions, a rush to find legal representation, and animosity on both sides. If you think divorce may be inevitable, get everything in order before making a final decision. Schedule appointments with a divorce attorney and your financial advisor. It’s good to have an idea of how much debt you have, how much equity you have in your home, and the value of any other assets you may have.

If you want a divorce, it’s important to communicate clearly and openly with your partner. This discussion should be had when both parties are calm, rather than during the middle of a heated fight. While divorce is never easy, you can take steps to make it less painful for everyone involved.

Protecting Your Children

Children are one of the most common reasons that couples hold off on divorce. There’s no doubt that divorce can be traumatic to children, but in many cases, it’s less traumatizing than living in an unstable household with unhappy parents who are always fighting.

Working with a divorce attorney and going through mediation with your soon-to-be-ex-spouse can help you act in the best interests of your children. Many divorcing couples have chosen to move away from the traditional adversarial divorce model in which everything from custody to asset division is used to try to get revenge on the other party. A solution-focused divorce model allows both parties to advocate for their rights during the divorce process while maintaining open communication and laying the groundwork for a strong coparenting relationship.

The Benefits of Legal Counsel

Even if you and your partner are on the same side regarding how you want to proceed with the divorce, it’s crucial to hire competent legal counsel. An experienced divorce attorney can explain the long-term implications of any agreements or concessions you make during the divorce process, allowing you to make more informed decisions. If there are areas where you and the other party cannot come to an agreement, allowing divorce attorneys to do most of the difficult negotiation allows you to minimize your direct involvement and preserve your coparenting relationship.

Dedicated legal counsel can also save you a considerable amount of time during the divorce process. Divorce is a complicated legal process that requires a substantial amount of paperwork and documentation, which can be difficult to manage on your own if you’re also moving, learning to parent on your own, and juggling work responsibilities.

Drunk Driving Fatalities Spike in July

by Leave a Comment

Summertime means more people enjoying the great outdoors and exploring new places. However, across the United States, summer is also a time when it’s extremely dangerous to be on the road, either as a driver or as a passenger.

A number of factors contribute to high drunk driving rates in the summer months. Many of the same things that make summer the most popular time of year are the same things that increase impaired driving rates—outdoor events, longer days, and more free time can all lead people to get behind the wheel when they shouldn’t.

Drunk Driving Statistics

Statistics indicate that impaired driving is a massive problem in the United States, and efforts to quell it have not been widely successful. Per the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, nearly 11,000 people died from drunk driving crashes. This averages out to one death every 48 minutes. Alcohol was a contributing factor in 29 percent of driving fatalities in 2017.

The same report shows that nearly 10 percent of fatal drunk driving crashes take place in July. Fatality rates creep up steadily in spring, peak in July, and gradually decrease throughout fall and winter. According to the CDC, alcohol-related crashes lead to over $44 billion in damages and expenses every year.

Experts note that the Fourth of July is a major reason that July is such a dangerous month for drunk driving accidents. Many extend the holiday and turn it into a long weekend, and without proper planning, many find themselves without a safe way to get home after a night of drinking. In 2017, 40 percent of all fatal crashes occurring during the Fourth of July week involved alcohol.

Penalties for Driving Under the Influence

Federal, state, and local governments have tried a wide range of tactics to stem the tide of drunk driving accidents. Many of these efforts have been punitive in nature. By implementing higher and higher fines for drunk driving arrests, legislators hope to dissuade people from driving while impaired. Additionally, many states have implemented mandatory minimum sentences for drunk driving offenders. While many municipalities do not have mandatory minimum sentences for first-time offenders, several have strict requirements for second, third, and additional offenses. As penalties for impaired driving have become more severe and the social stigma of impaired driving has grown, it’s become more difficult for drivers to defend themselves after an arrest.

Other campaigns have attempted to tackle the drunk driving issue on a societal level. Some campaigns strive to make events less alcohol-centered, while others aim to attach a greater stigma to drunk driving. Several organizations highlight fatalities and serious injuries caused by impaired drivers, hoping to show people the harm they could potentially cause when they get behind the wheel after drinking.

Across all of these programs and campaigns, results have been mixed.

Other Solutions to the Drunk Driving Problem

A growing number of programs try to provide solutions for drivers, rather than enforcing punitive measures. A rapid increase in ridesharing programs across the nation has provided affordable alternatives to many people after a night out. The NHTSA reports that over half of drunk driving crashes occur in urban areas, where consumers have many rideshare options. Some bars and restaurants offer free overnight parking for guests who cannot safely drive, allowing people to realize when they’ve had enough without worrying about getting their vehicle towed. Some cities offer a free shuttle service or free bus rides to people on nights when drunk driving is a common issue—this includes holidays like the Fourth of July and New Year’s Eve. Legislators in some states and cities have dedicated substantial funding to public transportation, recognizing that people may be less likely to drive while impaired if there is a safe and affordable way to get home instead.

One-Third of Medical Malpractice Cases Can Be Traced Back to This Error

by Leave a Comment

Medical malpractice is often associated with the dramatic scenarios of hospital dramas, whether it’s a drunk doctor amputating the wrong limb or a fraudulent practitioner blundering their way through a complicated surgery. However, in real life, medical malpractice is often a much more subtle and difficult-to-detect type of error. In fact, unless you’re a medical professional, you may not even know that a care provider has acted negligently in your care. One type of mistake makes up a significant portion of malpractice cases.

The Core Cause of Many Malpractice Cases

Malpractice is a huge source of legal expenses for clinics and hospitals, and consequently, a substantial amount of funding goes into research that uncovers the causes of malpractice. The Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine conducted a study analyzing the root causes of many cases, and they discovered that one-third of errors occur due to misdiagnosis or a missed diagnosis.

There are a number of reasons that missed or incorrect diagnoses are so common. A missed diagnosis is often traced back to an overworked physician who either failed to run the correct tests or did not properly interpret a patient’s symptoms and test results. In other situations, an inexperienced doctor may be unsure about their diagnostic skills or worry about recommending unnecessary treatment. Taking a “wait and see” approach to medicine may make sense in some situations, but in others, it can have harmful or even fatal consequences.

A misdiagnosis, much like a missed diagnosis, often occurs because a care provider does not fully analyze available evidence. Patients who see multiple specialists may be at higher risk, since each specialist may not fully review other specialists’ notes before making a diagnosis.

Within this area of medical malpractice, the majority of cases can be further traced to three areas of medicine: cancer treatment, vascular events, and infections.

Expenses Associated with Malpractice

Upon exploring the medical specialties most prone to misdiagnosis, it’s easy to see why the expenses of a medical malpractice case can be staggeringly high. In all three types of cases—cancer, vascular, and infection—a missed diagnosis allows the disease or event to become significantly worse. As a result, treatment costs may be higher or a disease may progress to the point that it can no longer treated. Vascular events, for example, require a near-immediate response to protect a patient’s life and mobility. An untreated infection can lead to sepsis and ultimately death. If a doctor misses a cancer diagnosis, the cancer may spread rapidly enough that treatment is unlikely to succeed.

Successful medical malpractice cases often yield high settlements or judgments. Victims may be entitled to any money they paid the neglectful care practitioner, as well as any medical expenses resulting from health issues caused by the initial error. Victims may also receive money for lost income, lost future income, pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and long-term care.

Legal Options for Victims of Medical Malpractice

Medical malpractice is an area of law that relies heavily on details and documentation. Poor care isn’t automatically negligent; an event must meet specific parameters to qualify as medical malpractice. Typically, the injured party must prove that the care provider acted in a way contrary to what any other similarly-trained provider would do in the same situation. Furthermore, laws regarding medical malpractice payouts vary quite a bit from state to state. If someone suspects that they or their loved one has been victimized by a negligent or malicious healthcare provider, it’s crucial to seek legal advice promptly, as the statute of limitations varies between states.

Pharmaceutical Recall Heightens Awareness of Personal Injury and Product Liability Cases

by Leave a Comment

From baby swings and car parts to medications, recalls are extremely common in the world of consumer goods. While some products are recalled as a preventative gesture—simply because they may have the potential to cause harm—others aren’t recalled until people have already suffered serious injuries. A recent recall of eyedrops sold at Walgreens and Wal-Mart is one of the former; though this product hasn’t been tied to any adverse events, the company has issued a voluntary recall.

Which Products Are Effected?

The July 2019 recall is for a line of over-the-counter eye ointments and eyedrops. The recalled batches were created for Walgreens and Wal-Mart store brands. In total, the recall includes 23 products. Altaire Pharmaceuticals Inc., the manufacturer, claimed that these products had the potential for non-sterility. The recall was issued for 150 lots.

While there have been no adverse events related to this recall, medical products produced in a non-sterile environment have the potential to cause serious illness, fatalities, and life-threatening infections.

Damages for Product Liability Cases

Recalled and defective products fall into an area of law known as product liability. When consumers are harmed by a product, they may be able to file a personal injury case against the manufacturer, retailer, or wholesaler. Product liability cases vary widely in potential damages; while one product may cause short-term issues that resolve on their own, another defective product could cause multiple deaths and lifelong injuries.

Many people harmed by defective products choose to work with personal injury lawyers; manufacturers often have massive legal budgets, making it difficult for an individual to bring a case against a company unless they already have an extensive knowledge of personal injury law. Individuals may ask for damages for medical bills incurred as a direct result of the event, potential future medical bills, long-term care, pain and suffering, lost wages, and lost future income, amongst other damages.

Major Product Liability Cases in the U.S.

Most recalls go much like the Altaire Pharmaceuticals recall; a notice is issued, people have the chance to return their potentially defective goods for a refund, and no one is harmed. However, in the backlogs of American legal history, you’ll also find massive product liability cases that left a trail of fatalities and injuries while causing irreparable damage to companies’ reputations.

One relatively recent recall involved faulty ignition switches installed in certain GM automobiles. This defect, discovered in February 2014, was linked to a number of potentially fatal issues. A dysfunctional switch could, for example, disable power brakes, prevent airbag inflation during a crash, or even turn off the engine while the car was in motion. This issue is ongoing, and the switches have been tied to 124 deaths and hundreds of serious injuries. Just a few years earlier, GM was at the center of another product liability suit. Its Dex-Cool coolant was found to cause engine damage. About 35 million GM customers were included in a class action lawsuit, and the company ended up paying out up to $800 to each customer.

Another case, which is frequently misunderstood in the public eye, involves a woman who sued McDonald’s for her coffee being too hot. After getting her coffee in the drive-through, she spilled the coffee in her lap and sustained serious burns. She filed a personal injury case against the company, and the resulting investigation showed that the McDonald’s location in question frequently kept its coffee at temperatures that were far too high for safe food service. As a result, the coffee was considered defective and the woman received nearly $3 million from the lawsuit.

What Illinois’ New Cell Phone Law Means for Personal Injury Cases

by Leave a Comment

As much as cell phones have made daily life more convenient, they have also made roads much more dangerous in nearly every part of the country. Drivers seem unable or unwilling to put their phones down while they’re driving, leading to a 9.3% increase in fatal crashes in 2017. In response, the state has passed a new law that takes a tougher stance on any cell phone use by drivers.

What the New Law Says

This new law, which went into effect on July 1, 2019, made all cell phone use illegal while driving. Previous laws simply banned talking on the phone while driving or texting, which made it very difficult for officers to hold drivers responsible for unsafe driving practices. In the past, people could get out of a texting while driving ticket by saying they were using the phone for navigation, dialing for a hands-free call, or checking the time. Now, rather than being a defense against a ticket, these statements are admissions to law violations.

Will This Law Keep Illinois Roads Safer?

Proponents of this law are optimistic that it will make Illinois roads much safer for pedestrians, other drivers, and passengers. Now, police officers can ticket drivers if they see them using their cell phone at all—they do not have to prove that the driver was texting or talking on the phone while holding it. Touching the phone at all can lead to a ticket. With the burden of proof set much lower than it was with previous laws, drivers are more likely to think twice when they just want to check a message or dial.

Previously, Illinois had fairly lax penalties for those caught using their cell phone while driving. The first violation would garner a warning and all further violations would be ticketed as non-moving violations. When these efforts failed to decrease accident rates or dissuade drivers from driving and texting, this stricter law was introduced. Now, drivers face a fee of $75 for a first offense, $100 for a second offense, $125 for a third offense, and $150 for all further offenses, in addition to court fees for their county.

Other States Passing Similar Laws

This law shouldn’t just put Illinois drivers on alert. Many other states are following suit and passing laws that will require drivers to hold themselves to a higher standard of safety. Beginning in August 2019, Minnesota will implement a full handheld device ban for drivers. A similar law will be enacted in Maine in September 2019. In Michigan, legislators are debating three different bills that could impact how people drive. One would allow for hands-free texting and driving, while others would take a harder stance on any cell phone usage.

Personal Injury Cases for Those Injured by Distracted Drivers

This may be welcome news to those who have been harmed by a distracted driver’s actions. It can be notoriously difficult to prove that a person was using their phone at the time of an accident. Now, however, police in Illinois and other states only need to see the phone in a driver’s hand to be able to write a ticket. If an injured party’s attorney can prove that the other driver was using a phone while driving—via cell phone records or a dash cam, for example—the injured party may have a much easier time recovering damages.

These laws, if they have the intended effect, may also decrease accidents in many states, allowing potential victims to avoid the pain and emotional drain of a personal injury suit in the first place.

7 Common Summertime Personal Injury Cases

by 1 Comment

Summertime is here, bringing with it sun, relaxing days on the beach, time with family—and no shortage of accidents that are likely to leave personal injury lawyers booked through fall. Take note of the biggest risks you face this summer and be cognizant of your surroundings to avoid unintentional injury.

1. Car Accidents

Car accidents remain one of the most common types of personal injury cases in summer. With people taking road trips or heading out on vacation, there are more cars on the road than almost any other time of year. While you can’t control how safely others drive, you can plan ahead to lessen the chance of being in an unsafe situation. Leave early and review routes before leaving.

2. Grilling Incidents

While many grilling injuries occur as a result of user error or inattention, grill accidents can also happen due to equipment malfunction. If your grill malfunctions while you’re using it, the results could be disastrous—and a product liability or defective productive lawsuit could help you recover your medical expenses and lost income.

3. Boating Accidents

As local lakes and bays become more crowded, boating accidents are inevitable. A substantial amount of boaters overestimate their own capabilities or imbibe while in charge of a boat. Boating accidents often lead to serious injuries, property damage, and even fatalities. After a boating crash caused by another person’s negligence, it’s important to connect with a personal injury attorney with substantial experience in this area of law.

4. Lawn Mowing Incidents

Lawn mowing incidents fall into the same basic category as grilling injuries. In most cases, they are caused by user error—perhaps someone doesn’t check the lawn for rocks before starting, uses the wrong type of fuel in their lawn mower, or isn’t aware of obstacles in their path. However, in other cases, a poorly designed product may be to blame. When a design flaw causes injury, the manufacturer could be liable.

5. Park and Playground Incidents

Kids are bound to end up with a few bumps and bruises in summer, but some injuries can seriously impact a child’s quality of life. Many injuries can be attributed to a parent’s negligence or inattention, ruling out the possibility of a personal injury case. Others, though, can be tied to poorly designed playground equipment that doesn’t meet safety standards. If you suspect that unsafe playground equipment could be at fault for your child’s injury, it’s worth speaking to a lawyer.

6. Injuries Caused by Swimming

Swimming is perhaps one of the most dangerous activities in summer. Even strong swimmers can overestimate their abilities and end up stuck in an undertow or in water that’s far too deep. In swimming areas that utilize lifeguards, victims of near-drowning incidents or family members of drowning victims may be able to seek damages through a personal injury case. However, personal injury cases require you to prove damages. While a near-drowning incident can be scary, it’s unlikely to lead to serious medical issues that require ongoing care, and a personal injury case may not be a viable option. On the other hand, a drowning incident that causes a fatality does have clear damages. A case may be successful if you can prove that the lifeguard in charge of the pool or body of water was negligent in their duties.

7. Sunburn and Heatstroke

Sunburn and heatstroke are two common summertime injuries that are usually fairly minor. In some situations, they can cause serious health issues. There are multiple situations in which a personal injury case might be a suitable option. Consider, for example, a child that suffers a debilitating sunburn because the parent used sunscreen that was later discovered to use expired or ineffective ingredients. A product liability case could help the family recover damages. If a parent places their child in the care of a daycare or babysitter who fails to use sunscreen, the parent may be able to bring a personal injury case against the caregiver if the child suffers serious medical issues because of their sunburn.

A little bit of extra preparation and caution can help make summer even more fun and memorable—and if someone else’s actions cause you harm, a personal injury lawyer may be able to assist you.

The Supreme Court Will Decide an International Custody Case

by Leave a Comment

When a relationship ends, it leaves lots of loose ends—particularly when there is a child involved. Under the best circumstances, determining child custody and visitation is difficult; when the parents have a contentious or volatile relationship, the stakes are even higher.

Such is the case for Michelle Monasky and Domenico Taglieri. The termination of their relationship was so fraught with controversy that their custody battle continues five years after it started.

The Timeline

After marrying in Illinois in 2011, Monasky and Taglieri relocated to Italy. Three years later, in 2014, they welcomed a daughter. Monasky alleged that Taglieri had been physically abusive to her. As a result, she left Italy and returned to Ohio with her two-week-old daughter.

Taglieri strove to protect his parenting rights, and an Ohio district court ruling sided with him. The appeals court judge noted that, in almost any situation, a baby should be a habitual resident of the country in which the matrimonial home exists.

Since then, the child has lived in Italy with her father. The mother, however, has continued exploring her legal avenues. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and determine whether or not the mother had a right to bring her to the United States—and, consequently, where the child will live after the ruling.

What Does the Supreme Court Case Mean

According to Anthony W. Kirby, a family law attorney, the Supreme Court is analyzing two elements: how to establish habitual residence and the standard of review appellate courts should apply.

“Analyzing the first, does a child have the ability to form such a strong connection with surroundings that removal would cause harm? Or should the Court look at the shared intent of the parents on where to raise the child prior to one party absconding? Lower Courts have implemented a slew of hybrid approaches to balancing these ideologies.  The Supreme Court will likely put more emphasis on shared intent while creating exceptions for intent to be overcome if enough time has elapsed or if unnecessary trauma would be caused by removal.

Analyzing the second, should they be concerned only with clearly erroneous findings of fact, or should latitude be granted to allow them a clean slate? The majority of the lower courts have decided to review habitual residence on a de novo basis. The Supreme Court will likely follow the path of the majority, stating that while the parents’ intent is a question of fact to be overturned only if clearly erroneous, the overall decision of habitual residence is a question of law to be reviewed de novo.”

Complicated Custody Cases

This international case highlights a number of issues that plague divorcing couples across the United States. While the international aspect of the custody issues are relatively uncommon, there are many other factors that can make a domestic custody dispute challenging.

When one parent wants to move with the child, they may be setting themselves up for a lengthy court battle. If the other parent agrees to allow them to move with the child, it’s usually as simple as signing some paperwork and switching the child’s legal residence. If the non-moving party disputes the other parent’s request, the court must go through the difficult process of determining what is in the child’s best interests. Laws and standards vary by state, but in general, a parent interested in relocating has an uphill battle ahead of them.

Another issue touched on in this custody case is abuse. The role of domestic abuse in custody situations varies between states. While a state cannot compel a party to interact with their abuser, the victim may still have to provide access to their shared children, unless they can demonstrate that the other party also poses a threat to the children. If the victim is required to share parenting time with the alleged abuser, the court may set up supervised visits or use a safe third location as a drop-off point. In many cases, a third party collects the children from one party and later transfers them to the care of the other party, ensuring that the ex-partners do not have to interact.

Ideally, in any custody case, both parties will be able to set aside their differences to benefit the children. That’s why many states require that divorcing couples go through a coparenting course—the communication techniques and standards needed to successfully coparent are often substantially different from those used in a romantic relationship. A lot is at stake when custody issues are up for debate; divorcing couples should make custody discussions a priority and come to a mutually beneficial agreement that serves the needs of the children.

Failed Criminal Justice Legislation Drives Wedge Between Arizona Advocates and Lawmakers

by Leave a Comment

Criminal justice reform has swept much of the nation as lawmakers move away from harsh punishment as a deterrent and begin exploring the value of rehabilitation. Many states in the nation have reduced mandatory sentences for nonviolent drug offenders, first-time offenders, and property crimes. According to criminal defense attorney Case Darwin, “restorative justice is becoming an increasingly high priority for many states that are looking to reduce recidivism.”  

Arizona was slated to join these states, as advocates and legislators appeared to be moving toward consensus on new bills. A last-minute veto has left advocates frustrated and muddied the waters for future negotiations.

Reform Bills Introduced in Arizona

Initially, the bills introduced by Rep. Ben Toma and Sen. J.D. Mesnard were originally much larger in scope. The representatives said that their motivation was to create a justice system that is truly based on justice, rather than punishment. They received a frosty reception from the House Judiciary Committee, which had a history of shooting down bills that would reduce penalties for nonviolent drug offenders, allow for judicial discretion in sentencing, and permit inmates to reduce their prison sentences by attending drug treatment programs. Two bills were introduced this session, and both quickly narrowed in scope as they came under fire from opponents.

Scaling Down the Bill

In an effort to get bills passed and start the path toward criminal justice reform in Arizona, the sponsors of the bill added a section that would still allow prosecutors to use enhanced sentences for first-time convictions, which was initially not included in the bill. Early in the session, legislators noted that they believed enhanced sentences should only be a viable option for multiple offenders who did not learn their lesson after their first conviction. Additionally, they removed a part of the bill that would have required the court system to collect data on plea deals and sentencing. Despite these compromises, legislators were shocked by last-minute resistance to their bills.

A Late Veto and a Divide in Arizona

The sponsors of these bills indicated that they made the request changes with the expectation that opponents would meet them in the middle and pass common-sense reform bills. Instead, prosecutors in Arizona lobbied against the bills and called on Governor Doug Ducey to veto them. Governor Ducey passed one bill that will allow some convicted on drug charges to get out of prison early. He vetoed the other bill, which would have prevented prosecutors from using charges intended for repeat offenders on first-time offenders.

In general, criminal justice reform is widely supported in Arizona. Bills that have passed have done so by a large margin. These measures could keep offenders with a low chance of recidivism from serving excessively long prison sentences, reducing the problem of prison overcrowding and minimizing the financial burden on the state. After this session, however, advocates are unsure about moving forward. They believe that prosecutors and legislators opposed to the bills acted in bad faith, which could weaken further efforts to pass criminal justice reform bills.

How This Could Affect the Public

Those who are charged with a crime may find themselves with over-the-top jail sentences and fines, due to a continued focus on retribution over rehabilitation. This bill will also impact those who are never accused of committing a crime; the current criminal justice system places a substantial burden on Arizona, and the money used to fund the system must be taken from schools, roads, and other public services. Down the road, many hope that legislators will be able to come to an agreement on criminal justice reform. Doing so could give more people a shot at a second chance and the freedom to reintegrate into society after a criminal offense.

Undiagnosed Heart Problem Leads to $11.5 Medical Malpractice Award for 11-Year-Old Girl

by Leave a Comment

The medical field is one subject to constant scrutiny and research, leading to frequent changes in standards and expectations—and for good reason. When patients see a medical professional, whether it’s for something as minor as a checkup or as major as emergency surgery, they should be able to feel confident that their practitioner has the skills and decision-making capabilities to keep them safe. When this system breaks down, either due to a practitioner’s action or inaction, patients can seek compensation with a medical malpractice case. A recent medical malpractice case in the Boston area brought closure to a family that suffered due to a 10-year-old error.

Emergency Room Visit Leaves Family Without Answers

In April 2009, Anna Coelho was 18 months old. Her parents brought her to the emergency room with possible dehydration caused by vomiting. After performing a chest X-ray, radiologist Dr. William Denison gave his diagnosis—bronchiolitis or atypical pneumonia.

However, he didn’t identify Coelho’s underlying issue: an enlarged heart caused by myocarditis.  That is the basis of the Coelho family’s claim against Dr. William Denison.

Long-Term Impact on the Patient

Anna Coelho has experienced significant issues as a result of her untreated myocarditis. She suffered cardiac arrest and heart failure. Both of these issues led to severe, permanent neurological injury. Per her attorney, Coelho’s neurological injury has left the 11-year-old developmentally similar to a 4-year-old.

Negligence on the Part of the Radiologist

According to Coelho’s lawyer, Dr. Denison was negligent when he failed to identify Coelho’s enlarged heart. The jury agreed with Coelho’s attorney, who alleged that the harm suffered by Coelho was preventable and that the radiologist should have noticed her heart issue on the X-ray. The family received an award of $11.5 million, due to the lifelong nature of Coelho’s injuries and the long-term care she’ll likely need with her developmental issues.

Radiology in Medical Malpractice

This case highlights a number of important facts in the world of medical malpractice. Radiology is number 7 on the list of top 10 medical specialties for lawsuits, falling in line behind high-risk specialties like OB/GYN, surgery, and orthopedics. Per the report, 70% of radiologists are sued at some point during their career. Due to the extremely high rate of lawsuits in this and other specialties, practitioners pay exceptionally high malpractice insurance rates. As a result, patients are able to seek compensation when they do not receive appropriate care from care providers.

Additionally, this case has something in common with many other medical malpractice cases—it alleges a lack of action or attentiveness on the part of the doctor, not incorrect action. When many people think about medical malpractice, they think of alarming cases where a doctor removes the wrong limb, leaves medical supplies inside a patient, or operates on the incorrect patient. In reality, many cases involve patients whose symptoms were ignored by a doctor, patients who did not receive timely care from a practitioner, and patients whose doctors did not respond appropriately to the severity of their condition.

To determine whether or not a healthcare practitioner was negligent in their care, medical malpractice attorneys look at whether or not a patient would have received the same care from another reasonable medical provider under the same circumstances.

While this case did go to court, many are settled out of court. In many situations, a settlement benefits both the wronged patient and the negligent caregiver, minimizing the patient’s attorney fees and limiting the time spent in deliberations. In this case, the court case lasted two weeks and jury deliberations took an additional two days.

Courts Revisit Tough Question: Can Genes Be Patented?

by Leave a Comment

To laypeople, the idea of having a gene patented may sound impossible. However, an amendment to federal patent legislation could allow pharmaceutical and biotech companies to patent genes, a decision that would have significant consequences for a variety of industries, medical care providers, and patients.

New Amendment Could Change Legal Precedent

Legal precedent was established in 2013 when Myriad filed a patent for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. These genes are utilized in diagnostic tests for breast and ovarian cancer. The company argued that they had the right to patent these genes because they were the company to isolate them. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that human genes cannot be patented, since they are a product of nature.

This new bill, which was introduced in Congress in May of 2019, would allow companies to patent human genes and associations between diseases and genes.

What This Means for Researchers, Companies, and Patients

If this bill passes, it could seriously impact the pharmaceutical industry, as well as companies that specialize in biotech and medical research. A company that patents a gene would have full rights to any experimentation on that gene, as well as the development of diagnostic tests and treatment options. In some situations, perhaps this would be advantageous. Companies with a truly philanthropic interest in the treatment of specific diseases could potentially have more resources to dedicate to the isolation of genes and the subsequent development of testing and treatment options.

The more likely scenario, however, is far less palatable for consumers and biotech development as a whole. Large companies with extensive funding could essentially dominate the field by focusing exclusively on gene isolation and securing patents. Once they successfully patent various genes and connections with diseases, they would be able to conduct research on their own schedule and at their leisure. In the meantime, other companies—including companies that could possibly develop cutting-edge testing and treatment options—would be unable to do any research with the patented gene. This is disastrous for smaller biotech companies and research facilities. It’s likely that they’d be unable to isolate genes as quickly as much larger companies, which would significantly limit the type and amount of research they could do. Consequently, they’d have a difficult time hiring talented researchers who want to discover new treatment options. Larger pharmaceutical and biotech companies could quickly develop a monopoly in several diseases.

Perhaps the most disastrous implication of this legal decision would be the effect on patients. Patients with debilitating or even fatal diseases do not have extra time to wait for a patent-holding company to decide that their disease is profitable enough to research. By limiting who can study and experiment on specific genes, legislators could leave thousands of patients waiting for cures or treatment options that may not come or may come too late.

Opinions Across Various Industries

Lawyers representing professionals across many different industries have voiced their opposition to this measure. At least 169 different organizations representing medical professionals, patients, and researchers have come out in strong opposition to the bill. The ACLU is one organization that has expressed concern over this bill. Kate Ruane, senior legislative counsel for the ACLU, said, “Congress should not upend years of settled law to grant corporations exclusive rights to examine our genes and hinder much-needed genetic research, testing and treatments for a range of diseases.”

Attorneys have outlined the potential fallout of this bill. They note that BRCA gene patents caused significant issues in the past, with Myriad’s monopoly on testing protocols leading to the shutdown of other labs that also conducted ovarian and breast cancer screenings. Myriad dramatically increased its testing prices when it held the patent, leading to serious issues for patients.

This bill could go one of several ways. It could pass if it gets the necessary votes or it could die on the legislative table if it doesn’t receive enough votes. If it passes, it’s likely that numerous advocacy groups and professionals organizations will fight it, possibly leading to another Supreme Court case.