LAS REGLAS DE CONDUCTA PROFESIONAL DEL BAR DEL ESTADO DE VIRGINIA REQUIEREN QUE TODOS LOS ABOGADOS HAGAN LA SIGUIENTE DECLARACIÓN Y RENUNCIA A LOS RESULTADOS DE SU CASO.
LOS ACUERDOS Y VERDICTOS EN TODOS LOS CASOS DEPENDEN DE DIVERSOS FACTORES Y CIRCUNSTANCIAS QUE SON ÚNICOS EN CADA CASO. POR LO TANTO, LOS RESULTADOS ANTERIORES EN CASOS NO SON UNA GARANTÍA O PREDICCIÓN DE RESULTADOS SIMILARES EN CASOS FUTUROS QUE LA FIRMA DE ALLEN Y SUS ABOGADOS PUEDAN ACEPTAR.
This medical malpractice case arose out of laparoscopic gall bladder removal surgery on a 53-year-old man. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant surgeon failed to identify and dissect out all pertinent biliary anatomical parts prior to clipping and ligating any biliary structure. As a result, the defendant surgeon misidentified what he believed to be an “accessory duct.”
Without further dissection and positive identification of this anatomical structure, the defendant clipped and cut the duct, transecting it, that is, cutting the patient’s common hepatic duct in the process. As a result, a large central portion of the plaintiff’s common hepatic duct and common bile duct was surgically removed. This same injury is well described in numerous medical publications as being the “classic injury” that can occur during a lap cholecystectomy procedure due to inadequate dissection and visualization of the key biliary anatomy.
As a result of the injury, the plaintiff underwent an extensive repair surgery, and the plaintiff remained hospitalized for approximately one month.
Following discharge, the plaintiff continued to experience medical difficulties, and additional surgery was performed. The plaintiff’s liver function tests and general medical condition will need close monitoring for the remainder of his life.
The case was settled following a lengthy mediation.