New Case Granted in Hospital Malpractice Suit
The South Dakota Supreme Court recently granted a new trial to a woman who suffered from complications following a gall bladder surgery in 2001. Lillian Glanzer claimed hospital malpractice against her surgeon, Dr. Richard Reed, however he was found not to be negligent in the original trial last year.
Glanzer underwent laparoscopic surgery to remove her gall bladder, during which the doctor had to cut through some scar tissue to insert the instrument into her abdomen. The surgery resulted in some complications and it was eventually discovered that Ms. Glanzer’s bowel had been perforated.
Because the doctor failed to diagnose this until four days after the surgery, the patient had to undergo multiple additional surgeries and a lengthy recovery time. Glanzer brought a hospital malpractice suit, in which the jury ruled in the favor of the hospital and Dr. Reed.
The verdict was appealed and on October 30th, the Supreme Court ruled that Glanzer deserves a new trial. The basis for the new trial is that the judge in the original trial failed to instruct the jury on how to view a doctor’s judgement and how it can relate to negligence. The failure to give this instruction to the jury may have unfairly influenced their decision.
Hospital malpractice doesn’t necessarily occur every time a doctor makes an error. However, when a doctor or medical professional uses only his or her judgement in determining a diagnosis (or lack thereof) rather than by medical means, it can often result in a case of malpractice.
It is undetermined when Ms. Glanzer’s new trial will begin.