- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Ediscovery
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Litigation Support Services
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
-
February 26, 2021Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice Partners Named to Minnesota Lawyer’s Power 30 List
-
February 22, 2021Robins Kaplan Expands Health Care Litigation Group
-
February 1, 2021Meegan Hollywood Selected to Join American Antitrust Institute Advisory Board
-
March 6, 2021With Our Voices 2021 Arc Gala
-
March 6, 20211st Annual Tee It Up for the Troops Winter Outing
-
March, 9, 2021The New Frontier of Software License Disputes
-
Winter 2021Pro Bono Publico–For The Public Good
-
Winter 2021The Case for Charitable Giving
-
Winter 2021The Fictional Wealth Disputes That We Took In and Learned From in 2020
-
February 26, 2021Financial Daily Dose 2.26.2021 | Top Story: Rising Long-Term Bond Yields Blamed for Jumpy Markets
-
February 25, 2021Financial Daily Dose 2.25.2021 | Top Story: McKinsey Ousts Managing Partner on Heels of Opioid Settlement
-
February 24, 2021Financial Daily Dose 2.24.2021 | Top Story: Chair Powell Promises Continued Fed Support for US Economy
Medical Malpractice Case Report: $2.5 million settlement for mishandling of biopsy slides resulting in healthy woman having an unnecessary double mastectomy
December 2006
Chris Messerly achieved a settlement of $2.5 million in a medical malpractice case for the mishandling of biopsy slides which resulted in a healthy woman having an unnecessary double mastectomy. Read the following Minnesota Association for Justice (MAJ), Minnesota Case Report:
Selected Results*
(Excerpts taken with permission from Minnesota Trial Lawyer Association’s (MTLA) “Minnesota Case Reports”)The plaintiff underwent a routine mammogram as part of a physical which revealed a questionable area. A needle biopsy was performed. Tissue from the needle biopsy was placed on slides bearing the plaintiff’s name and unique hospital number. Defendant pathologists ignored dozens of mandatory safety checks and mixed up the plaintiff’s slides and paperwork with those of another woman. Pathologist 1 had the plaintiff’s paperwork and another woman’s slides (which likewise bore the other woman’s name and hospital number). Pathologist 2 had the other woman’s slides and the plaintiff’s paperwork. Both pathologists 1 and 2 chose not to compare the names and numbers on each of the slides with the names and numbers on the mixed up paperwork accompanying the slides.
To compound the tragedy, pathologist 1 asked pathologist 2 to look at the other woman’s slides. In turn, pathologist 2 asked pathologist 1 to look at the plaintiff’s slides. Again, both pathologists chose not to compare any of the unique identifying information on the slides with the accompanying paperwork. As a result, pathologist 1 erroneously diagnosed the plaintiff with breast cancer. Pathologist 2 erroneously reported that the other woman had no breast cancer at all. The plaintiff had the option of treating her breast cancer with a double mastectomy, a single mastectomy, or a lumpectomy. Given her young age and her desire to do whatever she could to maximize the chances of cure, she chose the double mastectomy.
On the day of discharge from the hospital following the mastectomy, her surgeon told her that there was a mix-up and that in fact she never had cancer at all. She was told she could now go home. Unfortunately, the plaintiff developed a series of severe infections as a result of the unnecessary surgery which required multiple additional surgeries. To date, the plaintiff has still had no reconstruction performed due to these problems.
Settlement: |
$2,500,000 |
Case Name: | Woman & Her Husband v. Pathologists and Pathology Lab |
Date: | October, 2004 |
Attorneys: | Chris Messerly William J. Maddix |
Related Professionals
Chris Messerly
Partner
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.