Malpractice Suit Brought Against Doctors, Hospital Following Death of Patient

By Daniel Hawn

Published on August 22, 2005

The lawsuit was filed on account of the death of J. Michael Grady, 56, of Lakeland. Jack B Thigpen Jr. and Judith L. Randall, the two doctors from whom Grady received treatment, as well as Watson Clinic and Lakeland Regional Medical Center are named as defendants in the case.

On August 5, 2003, Grady, who was the chief executive officer of Juice Bowl, a citrus processor based in Lakeland, underwent elective hemorrhoid surgery at an outpatient facility that is associated with Watson Clinic and LRMC.

According to court documents, the day after the procedure Grady experienced pain and was unable to urinate. The lawsuit states Grady went to Watson Clinic where Thigpen inserted a catheter, however Grady continued to be in extreme pain for the duration of that day despite the use of painkillers.

The suit states that at 1:40 a.m. the next morning, Grady was taken to the LRMC emergency room, where, approximately 12 hours later, he died of a heart attack secondary to sepsis, an illness produced by toxins in the bloodstream.

The lawsuit states that the doctors involved in Grady's surgery failed to identify and treat the infection that killed him.

Comment on this article →

Keyword Tags: personal injury, medical malpractice, surgical mistakes, wrongful death

Comments

1

Would this be a negligent tort? The three categories to claim a negligent tort are Breached duty of care, Injury and Proximate cause. The plaintiff can argue that the there was breached duty of care because it was the doctors duty to care for the patient and due to their lack of care the patients situation (which would have been avoidable) deteriorated. Grady experience pain after the procedure and was unable to urinate and although some action was taken, the pain did not stop and Grady voiced this out.
In addition, there was harm to the patient who endured pain. In addition, there was emotional distress for the family. In fact the family may also be experiencing a loss in income had Grady been the bread winner.

Finally, the plaintiff could argue that the lack of initial care is what caused the toxins to enter the blood stream and resulted in the death of the patient. This I believe is foreseeable because Grady had not been able to urinate. The situation would not have ended in this way but for their negligence.

On the other hand, how would the defendant argue that they met their standard of care? In addition, could the defense argue that the heart attack was a superceding cause?

Aashna Puri, about 1 year ago

2

On the other hand, this was like two and a half years ago.

Aaron Poehler, about 1 year ago

3

My grandson died ,and the doctors were wrong , they said he had a EB skin diease.so they couldn't do his heart surgery. Now is is gone ,and the autopsy shown he did not have it inside of him. He could of lived.
victoria

Victoria, 7 months ago

Post your comment

Public comments are welcome. For answers to your personal questions, ask an attorney in our directory.

Name
Email (kept private)
Website
Message