KBR WINS DEFENSE VERDICT IN BRAIN DAMAGED BABY CASE

 

In this hotly contested medical malpractice action, KBR won a defense verdict on behalf of its clients, an OB/GYN resident and a major metropolitan hospital.  Plaintiff claimed that the defendants mismanaged her labor and delivery; specifically, plaintiff claimed that the defendants failed to perform a c-section to deliver the infant and that they negligently administered Pitocin.  The infant plaintiff suffers from brain damage, cerebral palsy and severe neurological and developmental delays.  Presently, the child is ventilator dependent and resides at an institution for neurologically impaired children.

 

The plaintiff supported his case with an expert in obstetrics and gynecology who testified that a c-section should have been performed immediately upon the mother's presentation to the hospital because there was evidence of meconium.  The expert opined that the presence of meconium provided a hostile uterine environment and that the fetus' condition worsened the longer she remained in utero.  The expert opined that the fetal monitoring strips revealed many instances of decelerations and an absence of variability, all of which were non-reassuring signs of fetal well-being.

 

The plaintiff also called an expert in pediatric critical care medicine who had examined the child shortly before trial.  He opined that the child's injuries were the result of hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and meconium aspiration.

 

In contrast, KBR called an expert neonatologist who explained that four criteria must be satisfied before an infant can be diagnosed with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and in this case, those criteria were not met.  Most significantly, this infant was born with normal cord blood gases which, he opined, negated the possibility of in utero oxygen deprivation. KBR's expert in OB/GYN explained that the fetal monitoring strips were reassuring and not indicative of fetal distress.  KBR called an expert geneticist as well who opined that this child presented with various conditions that pointed to a genetic cause of her injuries.

 

KBR's expert neonatologist explained to the jury that the absence of seizures within the first 24-48 hours of life precluded a diagnosis of hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy in this case.  He also emphasized that this child's normal brain MRI's were inconsistent with that diagnosis.

 

At the conclusion of the trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants, finding that they committed no departures from the applicable standard of care in this case.  As a result, the jury did not reach the issue of causation.

 

The plaintiff subsequently made a post-trial motion to set aside the verdict on various grounds.  The motion was denied.

Andrew S. Kaufman, of the Medical Malpractice group obtained this defense verdict.  Jacqueline Mandell handled the post-trial motion for the Appellate Practice group.

 

Royal, (Supreme Court, Richmond County, Index #:  11103/04)