Dr. Hyde
By michelle | Posted on January 15, 2009 | Filed Under Unbelievable Legal Stories
In Oregon, a doctor practicing as a radiologist recently had his license suspended by the Oregon’s Board of Medical Examiners. Just what do you have to do to have that happen? In this case, the details are shocking.
He was never board certified in radiology, which explains some of his significant lack of knowledge and repeated acts of negligence, including:
1. Doing a CT scan on a neck of a patient who was concerned about a lump in his neck, and the doctor found no abnormalities. In fact, the patient had a cancer in his neck, that did appear on the scan;
2. Doing a breast ultrasound of a woman and noting that there were several small cysts on her breast at the medial portion at 3 o’clock, when the cysts were actually at 11 o’clock at the lateral aspect;
3. After conducting a sonography of the patient’s arteries, determining that the patient had artherosclerosis, when in fact the patient was perfectly healthy;
4. The doctor misdiagnosed a patient after performing a CT scan on his lungs with a tumor, when the patient had pneumonia;
5. When one of his patients underwent a CT scan of the abdomen, the doctor noted that there were small cysts on the patient’s ovaries and a normal uterus when the patient had no ovaries or uterus;
6. And on a totally different case than that one, the doctor did a CT scan on one patient’s abdomen and hips and noted that the patient had a normal uterus when the patient had no uterus.
There are more issues Dr. Shoemaker had than that. His defense to his comments about the normal uteruses was that basically he was just indicating he didn’t see anything abnormal; and the Board disagreed and believed the statement that there is a normal uterus means that Dr. Shoemaker thought he saw one.
The Board could have revoked him, but it suspended his license. They ordered that his license remain suspended until he becomes board certified in radiology, which means that even if he didn’t want to do radiology and just do family practice, he couldn’t (at least not legally). The Board also had the ability to fine him, but it did not. They did, however, require him to pay all the costs of the hearing, which, due to the significant amount of doctor testimony needed to do what had to be done, was about $11,000. Hopefully his previous patients are ok — and hopefully he won’t be seeing much more in the future.
About this Post
Tags: license, Negligence, suspend
Permalink | Trackback |
|
Print This Article | 1 Comment
Legally Blonde
By brian | Posted on December 20, 2008 | Filed Under Personal Injury
Negligence cases against businesses are always a hot stop for an “average joe” to get a little money. Everyone is familiar with famous lawsuits like the McDonalds coffee case. As time goes on, more and more ridiculous cases arise, giving people the confidence that they can win almost anything…until it goes too far.
Well say hello to a “brilliant blonde” from Stratford, Connecticut, who bought a bottle of L’Oreal hair dye which she thought to be blonde but turned out to be brunette. Somehow, she didn’t realize the dye was brown until after she used it.
When someone asked “why don’t you just die your hair back to being blonde?” she claimed that “it wouldn’t give her her natural hair color back”……wait…..if she was looking for a natural color why was she dying it in the first place then, but then again, I’m not one to judge.
Her statements in court read:
“I can never go back to my natural blonde hair, I feel fake about that. Also blondes do get more attention than brunettes. Of course, emotionally, I miss that.”
“I was sick to my stomach, I had headaches, I don’t like myself, I stay home more than ever in my life, I wear hats most of the time.”
The young lady claimed that her emotional distress was so bad that she went to the doctor and was prescribed anti-depressant medication. Luckily, Judge Richard Gilardi dismissed the case, saving the American legal system the embarrassment of awarding this young lady anything at all.
Judge Gilardi responded to the media by saying “the plaintiff submitted no facts, no opinions and no standards to substantiate either of the allegations.”
Lesson to be learned: if you are going to sue, make sure the opposing entity did something wrong and you have at least a shred of evidence to prove that.
About this Post
Tags: dismissed case, hair dye, Negligence
Permalink | Trackback |
|
Print This Article | Leave a Comment
The opinions and information on this blog are not intended as legal advice. They are for informational and entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. Click here for the full disclaimer.
Other Resources
