Nurse's Lawsuit Claims Hospital Tried to Cover up Deadly MRSA Outbreak

According to a scathing Reuters investigation, tens of thousands of infection-related deaths are going unrecorded or uncounted, sometimes due to poor state and federal tracking programs and other times in an effort to mask the true cause of death. One mother was told her newborn died because of sepsis due to prematurity, when in fact her son was the fourth infant in the hospital's neonatal ward to contract methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, otherwise known as MRSA.

And one New Jersey nurse claims she was fired in retaliation for revealing hospital deficiencies in dealing with a staph infection outbreak its own infant intensive care unit. As superbug outbreaks become more and more common, what are hospitals' medical obligations to prevent and respond to such outbreaks, and what rights do hospital employees have?

MRSA Mishandling

Catherine Tanksley-Bowe, a former nurse at Cooper University Hospital in Camden, New Jersey, claims the hospital failed to follow state guidelines designed to prevent a MRSA outbreak from spreading in the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit, or NICU, last July. The New Jersey Department of Health confirmed the outbreak, saying two of the eight infants were infected died. When the state inspected Cooper following the incident, it did find "several infection control deficiencies."

Tanksley-Bowe's lawsuit claims she told the hospital's administrator and environmental service representative on August 8 that hospital staff weren't following necessary steps to prevent cross-contamination, nor were they properly cleaning supplies. Tanksley-Bowe also says she advised Cooper's Chief of Pediatrics that the hospital should notify nearby hospitals and stop accepting babies into its intensive care unit, but the hospital took neither step. She was fired on August 11, she believes, for complaining about the hospital's mishandling of the MRSA outbreak.

Hospital Liability

Hospitals can be liable for employee malpractice that injures a patient, and they are also responsible for protecting their own staff. While as employers hospitals generally have the right to fire employees for any reason or no reason at all, they may not fire employees for illegal reasons, one of which may be because the employee reported wrongdoing on the part of the employer.

The MRSA-related deaths at Cooper University Hospital may never have come to light without Tanksley-Bowe's lawsuit, but whether she will win her wrongful termination lawsuit remains to be seen.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• MRSA Outbreak At Cooper Hospital Comes To Light Because Of Lawsuit (CBS)
• When to Sue a Hospital for MRSA or Other Staph Infections (FindLaw's Injured)
• Ebola Nurse's Lawsuit: 3 Lessons for Personal Injury Cases (FindLaw's Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/nurses-lawsuit-claims-hospital-tried-to-cover-up-deadly-mrsa-outbreak.html

$3M Settlement for Man Paralyzed at AirMaxx Trampoline Park

In life, like in business, sometimes the most rewarding things, involve the most risk. Unfortunately for thrill seekers, there are some pretty serious consequences. In 2015, a 39-year-old Minnesota man was at an AirMaxx trampoline park with his son and wound up paralyzed from the neck down due to jump and fall. The facility had a foam pit that the man jumped into; but he landed on his neck, severing his spinal cord.

Despite having signed a waiver of liability prior to starting to jump around, the man’s attorneys alleged gross negligence, which generally cannot be waived. The trampoline park and plaintiff recently settled the man’s injury case for $3 million during mediation.

Big Settlement From Big Injuries

When someone is permanently injured in a disabling way, no financial award may adequately compensate the loss. For the plaintiff in this case, while $3 million is a lot of money, he is now paralyzed from the neck down. Much of the $3 million will be needed for future health care costs, and to adapt to a completely changed way of life. At 39 years old, he still has a significant life expectancy ahead of him, and likely will be unable to work.

Trampolines are dangerous and can lead to big liability because of the risk of big injuries. An older case that made headlines for the large $14.7 million settlement was the 2012 case of an adult injured twenty years before, while in middle school, as a result of trampoline accident at school. Similarly, the plaintiff there was paralyzed as a result of the trampoline accident, which justifies the multi-million dollar settlement amount.

Catastrophic Injuries

When a person suffers a catastrophic, life changing injury, seeking legal counsel from a qualified injury attorney is likely advisable. If the injury is the result of another’s negligence, or worse, an intentional act, you may be able to bring a legal action. Even if you are partly to blame, depending on whether your state follows contributory or comparative negligence rules, you may still be able to recover.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• Microsoft Workers Sue for Porn, Murder Exposure PTSD (FindLaw’s Injured)
• When to Sue After a Car Accident While Pregnant? (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Princess Cruises Sued for Gross Sewage Slip and Fall Injury (FindLaw’s Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/3m-settlement-for-man-paralyzed-at-airmaxx-trampoline-park.html

Female Gymnasts Sue Team USA Doctor for Decades of Sexual Abuse

A former Team USA doctors for the Olympic gymnastics team, along with the USA Gymnastics organization, and Michigan State University, are currently facing a civil lawsuit as a result of decades of alleged sexual abuse by the one doctor against minor athletes. Nearly 20 former and current athletes have alleged that Dr. Lawrence Nassar sexually abused them while he was conducting medical examinations on them.

The allegations stem back to the 1990s, and include claims that the doctor would grope and molest athletes during medical examinations, and would even digitally penetrate them as part of bogus procedures. In addition to the civil lawsuit, Nassar is facing federal criminal charges for possession of child pornography. The child pornography charges allege that Nassar possessed child pornography from 2003 to 2016. If convicted on those charges alone, Nassar could be facing anywhere from 5 to 40 years in prison.

Organizational Liability for Coaches and Doctors

The organizations that employed and recommended Nassar could face some civil liability, potentially, depending on what is discovered about their knowledge of the abuse. Generally, if an organization or school has no reason to know about or to suspect abuse, then it may be difficult to find the organization liable for the illegal actions of a coach or team doctor

 Schools and organizations have a duty to protect students from foreseeable injuries, but there are limits to what a school or organization can be held liable for. However, frequently, in civil actions, an organization will pay the settlements or verdicts on behalf of the bad actors that are held liable.

In the case of Nassar, the school and organization had received complaints about Nassar’s conduct in past, yet nothing was done until the Summer of 2015, when the organization USA Gymnastics claims to have first received complaints of abuse about Nassar. At that time, the organization cut ties with the doctor and reported the complaints to the FBI, but failed to report the abuse to the university where Nassar worked.

Related Resources:

• Injured by a medical practitioner? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• Lawsuit Claims Gymnastics Doctor Sexually Assaulted at Least 18 Female Athletes (FindLaw’s Tarnished Twenty)
• When to Sue After a Car Accident While Pregnant? (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Can I Sue for Verbal Assault or Insulting Language? (FindLaw’s Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/female-gymnasts-sue-team-usa-doctor-for-decades-of-sexual-abuse.html

When to Sue After a Car Accident While Pregnant?

Auto accidents are scary enough on their own, but when you are pregnant and get in a car crash, the level of fright is rather escalated. It is estimated that nearly 300 to 1,000 pregnancies are lost each year as a result of car crashes. While expectant parents are rarely thinking in terms of liability when disaster strikes, if the expectant parent was injured as a result of someone else’s negligence, both the parent and unborn child may have strong legal claims.

Unfortunately, according to a 2014 study, pregnant women are more likely to be involved in a car accident because being pregnant can result in being more easily distracted while behind the wheel for various reasons.

Depending on the state, a person can be held liable for the injury to an unborn child, or for the wrongful death of an unborn child. Regardless, if an unborn child is injured, or dies, the parent’s own injury claim can assert their own damages as a result of the lost pregnancy.

Sue Now or Later?

Even when a parent’s injury may be minor, or resolve within a few months, waiting until the pregnancy is completed before settling any legal claims is good option. The caveat to this is if there are particular time limits involved. For instance, in California, a statute of limitation for an injury claim can be as short as six months if it is against a state or local government agency. However, because the statute of limitations for injury claims is generally longer than pregnancy, waiting to finalize a settlement is recommended.

Each state has a different statute of limitation, or deadline, by which a person has to file a lawsuit or lose their right to do so. Be sure to check the laws of your state before you decide to put a possible lawsuit on hold. If you wait too long, you may lose your ability to bring a claim.

Get Legal Help Now

Waiting to finalize a settlement does not mean delaying getting legal help, or letting a statute of limitations expire. If you were injured in a car accident, seeking out legal help early on is advisable. However, if there is even a remote possibility that an injury occurred to your unborn child, waiting until after you give birth to sign a release or settle is probably a smart move.

Related Resources:

• Injured in an accident? Get matched with a local attorney. (Consumer Injury)
• Top 7 Legal Issues for Pregnant Women and New Moms (FindLaw’s Law and Daily Life)
• Lawsuit: Apple’s FaceTime Blamed for Child’s Death (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Mom, Tasered While Pregnant, to Get $55K (FindLaw’s Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/when-to-sue-after-a-car-accident-while-pregnant.html

Microsoft Workers Sue for Porn, Murder Exposure PTSD

As the old saying goes, when fighting monsters, a person has to be careful not to become a monster themselves. However, when a person works for a company that forces them to watch videos that are nothing less than monstrous, the company might be responsible for protecting employees’ mental well-beings. A recent lawsuit by two Microsoft employees against their employer is premised on that neglected responsibility.

The two employees are suing because they were pushed too far into the belly of the beast and emerged on the other side with PTSD. The beast in this instance is the internet, and as part of their online safety jobs at Microsoft, these employees were required to monitor online content and review the content that needed to be removed.

The men assert that the content they were forced to view included the most base and vial content imaginable, ranging from child pornography to murder. As a result of viewing this content, both men allege that they have suffered psychologically, and that both now have PTSD as a result of viewing disturbing content.

Lack of Psychological Safeguards

The employees are alleging that Microsoft failed to provide the appropriate safeguards in terms of regular counseling for employees exposed to the traumatic content. Rather than providing counseling, the company’s wellness program suggested that employees take breaks, walks, smoke, or play video games. Shockingly, Microsoft did provide a much higher level of psychological support to another team that held a similar task.

The employees that filed suit were forced to continue watching disturbing content as part of their jobs, despite their protests and attempts to transfer out. One was unable to transfer out due to company policy and the other literally had a mental breakdown.

Corporate Liability for Dangerous Jobs

While normally workers compensation would cover an employee’s claim of work related illness or injury, the Microsoft employees had their claims denied. However, companies usually cannot escape liability for injuries sustained by their employees on the job, especially if the injury was sustained in the scope and course of the employee’s job.

Related Resources:

• Hurt on the job? Have your injury claim reviewed for free. (Consumer Injury)
• Smartwatches and Distracted Driving Laws (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Top 5 Deadliest Jobs (FindLaw’s Injured)
• Top 10 Most Dangerous Jobs in the USA (FindLaw’s Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/microsoft-workers-sue-for-porn-murder-exposure-ptsd.html

Can I Sue for Verbal Assault or Insulting Language?

In some limited situations, an individual can be sued for yelling at or for insulting another person. While the threshold for when an insult or scream crosses the line is rather hazy, there are some clearly defined lines that are helpful.

For instance, if the yelling is threatening violence, or is done in a way where the listener fears for their physical safety, there are likely possible legal consequences. Not only is the act of making a threat of violence illegal in every state criminally (so long as the threat is credible), but it can also lead to civil torts, such as assault, or intentional inflection of emotional distress.

Are Insults Actionable?

While some might think that the First Amendment of the Constitution would protect insults, there are indeed limits. Generally, those limits tend to involve insults that shock the conscious, or offend a listener to the point of producing an adverse physical reaction, or invoke violence.

Insults can also make up the basis of an Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) claim. IIED requires a plaintiff to prove that another person intentionally acted (which could include making insults) with the specific purpose of causing the plaintiff to be shocked, distressed, upset, or emotionally hurt or injured.

Additionally, insults that are discriminatory can also lead to additional legal liability depending on the context and state law. For instance, in California, the Unruh Act prohibits businesses from discriminating against customers.

The Tort of Assault

While, generally, people think of assault as the actual hitting or beating of another person, under the law, the legal claim of assault does not require any touching to occur. For an assault to occur, an aggressor only needs to make some overt act or statement (backed up by context or other conduct), that would make a reasonable person fear for their safety.

For an assault to be actionable in a civil court, the person being assaulted needs to be able to prove not only that the incident happened, but also that a reasonable person would have feared for their safety, and that as a result, they suffered damages, such as emotional distress or other more tangible financial losses (such as costs for therapy).

Related Resources:

• Find Personal Injury Lawyers in Your Area (FindLaw's Lawyer Directory)
• Can You Sue Over Anti-Gay Slurs? (FindLaw's Injured)
• Can You Sue Anonymous Internet Trolls? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
• Woman Sues Subway Over 'Big Mama' Insult (FindLaw's Free Enterprise)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/can-i-sue-for-verbal-assault-or-insulting-language.html

Catholic Hospital Refuses Transgender Man's Surgery, Gets Sued

A transgender New Jersey man has filed a sex and gender discrimination lawsuit against St. Joseph's Regional Medical Center after it refused to perform his hysterectomy because it is a Catholic hospital. Jionni Conforti alleges that a hospital nurse originally scheduled the surgery, but was overturned by the hospital's director of mission services, Father Martin Rooney.

Conforti's lawsuit is the latest flashpoint in the battle between equal rights for transgender people and medical practitioners who claim they are unable to perform certain procedures based on religious doctrine.

Standard of Care

Conforti began his gender transition in 2004, and in 2015 scheduled the hysterectomy to remove the uterus with which he was born. According to his lawsuit, however, a hospital administrator then informed him the procedure could not be performed at the Catholic hospital. Conforti was able to have the procedure done at a different hospital three months later, but not before he felt "shocked and saddened" by the hospital's treatment.

"I felt completely disrespected as a person," Conforti said in a statement. "That's not how any hospital should treat any person regardless of who they are. A hospital is a place where you should feel safe and taken care of. Instead I felt like I was rejected and humiliated." His lawsuit is asking for monetary damages and an injunction against the hospital refusing medical care to transgender patients.

Patient Rights v. Religious Directives

St. Joseph's allegedly has a "patient bill of rights" that guarantees medical services without discrimination based on "gender identity or expression," but it is not the first to deny certain procedures based on religious grounds. A recent report from the American Civil Liberties Union revealed that Catholic-run hospitals regularly deny female patients certain reproductive health care options based on religious directives.

Although some religious hospitals have changed their stance in the face of discrimination lawsuits, there is no federal law that requires all medical facilities to perform all medical procedures. Hospitals that accept Medicare are only required to provide stabilizing care in medical emergencies. And it seems that Catholic hospitals' adherence to religious directives when deciding on which services to provide which patients could provide a fertile legal battleground for years to come.

Related Resources:

• Have a discrimination claim? Get your claim reviewed by an attorney for free. (Consumer Injury)
• Transgender Man Sues Catholic Hospital for Refusing Surgery (The Washington Post)
• Common Ways Hospitals May Discriminate Against Patients (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
• Can Religious Hospitals Deny Procedures? (FindLaw's Injured)

from Injured http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2017/01/catholic-hospital-refuses-transgender-mans-surgery-gets-sued.html