Last week, a Queens jury cleared the NYU Langone Medical Center and one of its doctors of medical malpractice in a case that involved the death of a patient after a kidney transplant. Vincent Liew died at age 37, less than one year after receiving the kidney because the transplanted organ infected him with uterine cancer. This is a tragically sad case that cost a man his life and left behind a grieving widow. It provides key lessons for patients and lawyers. Facts of the Case Victor Liew developed kidney disease from diabetes and his kidneys weakened to the point that he required a transplant. The waiting list for an organ transplant is long and there is no guarantee that a patient will find a matching organ. Waiting for an available organ is very stressful; finding an organ brings great joy. In April of that year, the hospital notified Mr. Liew that a matching kidney was available. Mr. Liew underwent the transplant, but he immediately experienced problems with the kidney. He ultimately died in August and an autopsy revealed that he died of uterine cancer. What went wrong? The donated kidney came from a woman who died of a stroke at St. Luke’s Cornwall Hospital in upstate Newburgh. The New York Organ Donor Network matched the organs with the recipients. At least three patients received organs (kidneys and a heart) from that woman and all three patients died shortly after the transplant. It turns out that the donor had uterine cancer and the hospitals, doctors and patients receiving the organs were unaware of that fact. In Mr. Liew’s case, he and his doctor were unaware that the kidney he was about to receive carried this deadly disease. Why did the jury find the doctor not guilty? Mr. Liew’s original attorney sued the doctor but no one else. However, the doctor was not at fault here. The mistake came somewhere between the original hospital and the New York Organ Donor Network, which failed to screen the donated organ. The statute of limitations against the original hospital and the New York Organ Donor Network expired. Mr. Liew’s widow hired a new lawyer who continued the case against the doctor. Ultimately, a jury found that the doctor was not at fault; he had followed good and accepted medical practice in relying on the integrity of the original hospital and the Organ Donor Network to properly screen organs before transplant. It is interesting to note that the hospital where Mr. Liew received his kidney (NYU) is suing both St. Luke’s Cornwall Hospital and the New York Organ Donor Network for failing to adequately screen the donated organ. Lessons Learned This case offers a few lessons for attorneys and patients. First, it is important to recognize that medical malpractice cases are hard to prove in court. You must prove that the offending health care provider deviated from good and accepted medical care and that the deviation caused substantial harm. In the Liew case, Mr. Liew and his widow suffered substantial harm but not because of the actions of Mr. Liew’s doctor. Second, not all bad outcomes result from medical malpractice. I have seen enough cases that have caused great sadness, but not resulted from deviations from good and accepted medical practice. Sometimes excellent doctors and medical professions do their jobs well and patients still die or suffer poor outcomes. However, in those cases where the medical professionals did not follow good and accepted medical practice, it is important to hold them accountable and to press medical malpractice claims. It is also important to identify who caused the damage. Simply put, attorneys must know whom to sue. In this case, the original attorney hired by the Liew family failed to identify the parties that had committed the error and caused Mr. Liew’s death. They sued the wrong person.
Posted on: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 16:00:30 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015