))
Radiologist Misread Image; Patient Blinded; Jury Awards $7.1 Million, with Dominic Guerrini
Manage episode 449186385 series 3490836
Content provided by Brendan Lupetin. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Brendan Lupetin or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://ro.player.fm/legal.
Dominic Guerrini of Kline & Specter discusses the $7.1 million verdict he recently secured for a young woman rendered legally blind after a radiologist misread a CT scan image. With host Brendan Lupetin, Dominic breaks down how he managed the case with multiple defendants, why he decided not call the defendant radiologist to testify, and how consultants prepped his client for testifying. Among other strategies, they had the 23-year-old woman write a letter to younger self to prepare herself for what eventually unfolded. Dominic read the letter at trial. “It was one of the most moving pieces of evidence that I have ever had,” he says.
Learn More and Connect
☑️ Dominic Guerrini | LinkedIn
☑️ Kline & Specter | LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook
☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn
☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube
☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube
Episode Preview
- Dominic’s journey started at Kline & Specter three months into his legal career. “It’s been a wonderful ride.”
- The firm’s founders, Tom Kline and Shanin Specter, influenced Dominic with their own styles: Shanin taught the value of preparation; Tom taught the art of presentation.
- Great advice: A paralegal once suggested that Dominick smile more in the courtroom to show jurors his true self. “Years later, that has stuck with me.”
- Background of Mitchell v. AHN Saint Vincent Hospital, in which Dominic won a jury verdict of $7.1 million for his client who was rendered legally blind after a radiologist misread a CT scan image.
- How Dominic used sound bites of themes and theories for the jury to repeat so they stuck.
- When it came to trial, the radiologist and hospitalists threw off the gloves and the finger-pointing started. “And, obviously, when you have defendants who are pointing the finger at one another, it’s our best day.”
- How Dominic countered the defense “comparative fault” argument that his client bore some responsibility because she didn’t return to the hospital for three days as her vision worsened.
- Why Dominic leaned on consultants to help his client – in a cross between therapy and trial preparation – before she took the stand.
- How jurors broke down the verdict: 90% for the defendant and 10% for Dominic’s client.
Ready to refer or collaborate on med mal, medical negligence, and catastrophic injury cases? Visit our attorney referral page at PAMedMal.com/Refer. We handle cases in Pennsylvania and across the United States.
33 episoade
Distribuie
