Friday, September 18, 2009
Will Social Security Run Out of Money?
Do you ever worry that Social Security benefits will not be available by the time you are ready to retire? We have all heard the stories, now take a look at this article.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Backlogs in Processing Disability Claims - More People are filing Claims
If your claim for Social Security Disability benefits is denied, you can appeal and request a hearing. This is good news because most claims, in my opinion, if approved are done so at the hearing. The bad news is that there is such a backlog of disputed disability claims, some people wait years for a hearing. According to a recent blog, "the Associated Press, the number of Americans receiving Social Security disability has doubled since 1990 to 7.4 million while the number of workers processing the claims has dropped. More than 765,000 people are currently waiting for a hearing -- twice as many as in 1998. The wait time for a hearing is twice what it was in 2000."
Unfortunately the recession has not helped this situation. For more read here.
Unfortunately the recession has not helped this situation. For more read here.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Social Security Payments
The Social Security Administration provides regular statements which estimate the amounts that individuals should receive for Social Security Retirement, Disability, Dependents, etc.
If you need to get a copy of your most recent statement, click here.
If you need to get a copy of your most recent statement, click here.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
How to Win Your Disability case?
The most important point to remember when applying for disability is that you have to prove that your injuries or medical conditions meet the definition and guidelines established by the Social Security Administration. The best way to do that is through sufficient medical documentation.
Does anyone out there have any war stories regarding applying for disability? Please share.
Does anyone out there have any war stories regarding applying for disability? Please share.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Social Security Disability - Frequently Asked Questions
Q. What is Social Security Disability?
A. Social Security disability benefits are monies paid to you if you have worked for a long enough period and paid Social Security taxes though your employer and become disabled.
Q. How do I qualify for Social Security Disability?
A. You may quality to receive benefits if you have a medical condition or injury that prevents you from working for a minimum of one year.
Q. How does the Social Security Administration determine disability?
The Social Security Administration has a five step process in determining disability.
Step One -The first step involves determining if you are working. The amount of money you make if you are working is limited. If you make more than allowed, you will not be considered disabled.
Step Two - The second step is to consider the severity of your medical condition(s) if you make less than the current guideline amount. This involves determining whether your medical condition(s) significantly affect you ability to perform basic work activities, i.e. sitting, standing, walking, for at least one year.
Step Three - If the condition is severe enough to limit basic work functions, the agency will determine if the medical condition(s) are on a List of Impairments for adults and children developed by the agency. The impairments described are considered so severe by the agency that you can automatically be defined by law as disabled. If your condition is not on
the list, the agency can determine that you are disabled if your condition(s) are as severe as those on the list of impairments.
Step Four - If your medical condition(s) are not on the list of impairments or meet or exceed the severity of an impairment on the list, the agency will then consider whether you medical condition(s) prevent you from doing the type of work you did before.
Step Five - If the agency decides that you can do the type of work you did before, then it will decide you are not disabled. If not, then the agency will evaluate your medical condition(s), age, education, past work experience and skills learned from that work, to determine if you can do any other type of work. If you can, then the agency will decide that you are not disabled.
Q. How long will it take to settle my Social Security Disability case?
A. This is a hard question to answer as there is no definite answer. The current estimated time for disposing of a case from the filing of the initial application to a hearing is approximately 24 months, sometimes longer. This can be a very long and stressful process. Put your case in our hands and let us help you through this process.
Q. How much will the Social Security Administration pay me if approved?
A. The amount of benefits is determined by your average lifetime earnings and whether your benefits will be reduced based on the receipt of other types of compensation for you medical condition(s), such as workers' compensation. The Social Security Administration sends out a yearly statement providing your lifetime earnings and provides an estimate of your disability benefit.
Q. How far back will Social Security pay me if I am approved?
A. If you are approved for social security disability, your first check will be paid for the sixth full month after the date your disability started.
Q. What can I do to help win my Social Security Disability case?
A. You need sufficient medical documentation to support the severity of your medical condition(s). You should keep up with your medical treatment and doctor appointments. It may also be helpful to keep a diary to help document on a daily basis your disability keeps you from performing your past work; your medications and side effects; your aches and pains; and how disability or medications affect daily activities such as driving, shopping, taking care of family, walking, standing, sitting, memory, concentration, coping with stressful situations, and
dealing with other people etc.
Q. Can I work and still receive Social Security Disability?
A. Yes. However, the agency limits the amount can make.
Q. Do I have to be permanently disabled to receive social security disability?
A. You are entitled to benefits if your medical condition(s) are severe enough to prevent you from working for a period of at least one year. If your condition improves your benefits can be terminated.
Q. Will I receive Medicare?
A. You will get Medicare coverage automatically after you have received social security disability benefits for two years.
Q. How much will an attorney charge?
A. The Social Security Administration will withhold 25% of your past due benefits to compensate legal fees.
Q. Will my family receive anything if I am approved?
A. If you are approved for Social Security Disability benefits, members of your family may qualify for benefits. They include but are not limited to the following:
Your spouse, if he or she is 62 or older;
Your spouse, at any age if he or she is caring for a child of yours who is younger than age 16
or disabled;
Your unmarried child, including an adopted child, or, in some cases, a stepchild or grandchild.
The child must be under age 18 or under age 19 if in elementary or secondary school full time; and
Your unmarried child, age 18 or older, if he or she has a disability that started before age 22.
(The child’s disability also must meet the definition of disability for adults.)
A. Social Security disability benefits are monies paid to you if you have worked for a long enough period and paid Social Security taxes though your employer and become disabled.
Q. How do I qualify for Social Security Disability?
A. You may quality to receive benefits if you have a medical condition or injury that prevents you from working for a minimum of one year.
Q. How does the Social Security Administration determine disability?
The Social Security Administration has a five step process in determining disability.
Step One -The first step involves determining if you are working. The amount of money you make if you are working is limited. If you make more than allowed, you will not be considered disabled.
Step Two - The second step is to consider the severity of your medical condition(s) if you make less than the current guideline amount. This involves determining whether your medical condition(s) significantly affect you ability to perform basic work activities, i.e. sitting, standing, walking, for at least one year.
Step Three - If the condition is severe enough to limit basic work functions, the agency will determine if the medical condition(s) are on a List of Impairments for adults and children developed by the agency. The impairments described are considered so severe by the agency that you can automatically be defined by law as disabled. If your condition is not on
the list, the agency can determine that you are disabled if your condition(s) are as severe as those on the list of impairments.
Step Four - If your medical condition(s) are not on the list of impairments or meet or exceed the severity of an impairment on the list, the agency will then consider whether you medical condition(s) prevent you from doing the type of work you did before.
Step Five - If the agency decides that you can do the type of work you did before, then it will decide you are not disabled. If not, then the agency will evaluate your medical condition(s), age, education, past work experience and skills learned from that work, to determine if you can do any other type of work. If you can, then the agency will decide that you are not disabled.
Q. How long will it take to settle my Social Security Disability case?
A. This is a hard question to answer as there is no definite answer. The current estimated time for disposing of a case from the filing of the initial application to a hearing is approximately 24 months, sometimes longer. This can be a very long and stressful process. Put your case in our hands and let us help you through this process.
Q. How much will the Social Security Administration pay me if approved?
A. The amount of benefits is determined by your average lifetime earnings and whether your benefits will be reduced based on the receipt of other types of compensation for you medical condition(s), such as workers' compensation. The Social Security Administration sends out a yearly statement providing your lifetime earnings and provides an estimate of your disability benefit.
Q. How far back will Social Security pay me if I am approved?
A. If you are approved for social security disability, your first check will be paid for the sixth full month after the date your disability started.
Q. What can I do to help win my Social Security Disability case?
A. You need sufficient medical documentation to support the severity of your medical condition(s). You should keep up with your medical treatment and doctor appointments. It may also be helpful to keep a diary to help document on a daily basis your disability keeps you from performing your past work; your medications and side effects; your aches and pains; and how disability or medications affect daily activities such as driving, shopping, taking care of family, walking, standing, sitting, memory, concentration, coping with stressful situations, and
dealing with other people etc.
Q. Can I work and still receive Social Security Disability?
A. Yes. However, the agency limits the amount can make.
Q. Do I have to be permanently disabled to receive social security disability?
A. You are entitled to benefits if your medical condition(s) are severe enough to prevent you from working for a period of at least one year. If your condition improves your benefits can be terminated.
Q. Will I receive Medicare?
A. You will get Medicare coverage automatically after you have received social security disability benefits for two years.
Q. How much will an attorney charge?
A. The Social Security Administration will withhold 25% of your past due benefits to compensate legal fees.
Q. Will my family receive anything if I am approved?
A. If you are approved for Social Security Disability benefits, members of your family may qualify for benefits. They include but are not limited to the following:
Your spouse, if he or she is 62 or older;
Your spouse, at any age if he or she is caring for a child of yours who is younger than age 16
or disabled;
Your unmarried child, including an adopted child, or, in some cases, a stepchild or grandchild.
The child must be under age 18 or under age 19 if in elementary or secondary school full time; and
Your unmarried child, age 18 or older, if he or she has a disability that started before age 22.
(The child’s disability also must meet the definition of disability for adults.)
Friday, May 8, 2009
Medical Malpractice
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
Robert Guinan, Appellant, v. Tenet Healthsystems of Hilton Head, Inc, et al., Respondents.
FACTS
Guinan suffered from neck, shoulder, and other pain, and received epidural injections of pain medication in his cervical spine on March 13, 2002, from Dr. Philip James Zitello (Zitello). After the injection, Guinan began experiencing chest pains and weakness in his legs. As a result, Guinan contacted Dr. Gaston O. Perez (Perez), his family physician. Perez examined Guinan, administered some medications, and instructed Guinan to go to the emergency room at Hilton Head Regional Medical Center (Hilton Head Regional).[2] Perez contacted the emergency room and explained Guinan's relevant medical history. Additionally, Perez contacted Zitello, and Zitello agreed to meet Perez and Guinan at the emergency room.
Perez admitted Guinan into the emergency room and ordered a neurology consult. Dr. Harvinder Kohli (Kohli) performed the neurology consult and ordered the administration of a blood thinner to treat a suspected spinal cord occlusion or clot. Kohli called Memorial Health University Medical Center (Memorial Health) in Savannah, Georgia, to discuss the case with a neurosurgeon and spoke with Dr. James Lindley (Lindley).[3] Lindley suspected Guinan's symptoms were related to a hematoma (or a bleed), rather than a clot. As a result, the blood thinner was discontinued, and Guinan was transported to Memorial Health. Upon arrival, Guinan was given a MRI, which revealed the presence of a hematoma in Guinan's cervical and thoracic spine. Lindley successfully evacuated the hematoma.
Guinan brought a medical malpractice action against Hilton Head Regional, Kohli, and Zitello. Guinan alleged Hilton Head Regional: (1) failed to properly diagnose the hematoma; (2) failed to properly administer drugs; (3) administered drugs known to be or should have known to be dangerous to Guinan; (4) failed to warn Guinan of the danger presented by the drugs; (5) failed to require Zitello to be present in the emergency room; (6) failed to obtain a neurological consult; (7) failed to exercise the degree of care required of physicians in an emergency room setting; (8) failed to have proper diagnostic equipment available; and (9) failed to immediately transfer Guinan to Memorial Health for emergency care. As to Kohli, Guinan asserted he: (1) failed to properly diagnose the hematoma; (2) failed to properly treat Guinan; (3) increased the harm to Guinan by administering drugs he knew or should have known would harm Guinan; (4) failed to consult a neurosurgeon prior to administering the blood thinner; (5) failed to exercise the degree of care required by the circumstances; and (6) failed to immediately transfer Guinan to Memorial Health for emergency care. Lastly, Guinan claimed Zitello: (1) failed to properly administer the epidural injection; (2) failed to recognize the symptoms of a failed epidural injection; (3) failed to warn and inform Guinan of the symptoms of an epidural injection and warn Guinan of possible paralysis; (4) failed to attend to Guinan at the emergency room; (5) failed to see that Guinan was immediately sent to surgery; (6) failed to exercise the degree of care required of physicians in the profession; and (7) failed to warn and inform Guinan of the risks of an epidural hematoma and other risks of the epidural injection.
The first scheduling order in this case was dated September 7, 2005, and provided an April 15, 2006, discovery deadline. On May 26, 2006, an amended scheduling order was issued extending the deadline to June 1, 2006. After a motions hearing on July 12, 2006, a final scheduling order was issued extending the deadlines for another forty days. The scheduling order also stated the defendants could not file motions for summary judgment until the expiration of the discovery deadlines.
On October 2, 2006, after the discovery deadlines had expired, the master heard the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Sixteen days later, the master issued an order granting the defendants' motion. The master found Gupta testified he was not an expert in the field of neurology or emergency medicine; had never been involved in the diagnosis and treatment of a patient with spinal hematoma; had no criticisms of the nursing staff at the emergency room, or of Kohli; stated Kohli administered the standard of care relative to the care and treatment of Guinan; did not have any material experience in an emergency room in the United States; was unwilling to comment on the performance of emergency room physicians; and did not offer any opinion that any act of the defendants was the proximate cause of any of Guinan's injuries.
Additionally, the master found the time for discovery had expired, and Guinan had a full and fair opportunity to complete discovery. Accordingly, the master granted defendants' motion for summary judgment because Guinan was without expert testimony to create a genuine issue of material fact with respect to his claims of medical negligence against the defendants. This appeal followed.
Standard of Review
"Since it is a drastic remedy, summary judgment 'should be cautiously invoked so that no person will be improperly deprived of a trial of the disputed factual issues.'" Baughman v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 306 S.C. 101, 112, 410 S.E.2d 537, 543 (1991) (quoting Watson v. S. Ry. Co., 420 F. Supp. 483, 486 (D.S.C. 1975)). An appellate court reviews the grant of summary judgment under the same standard applied by the circuit court. David v. McLeod Reg'l Med. Ctr., 367 S.C. 242, 247, 626 S.E.2d 1, 3 (2006). The circuit court should grant summary judgment "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Rule 56(c), SCRCP. In determining whether any triable issues of fact exist, the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom must be viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Law v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 368 S.C. 424, 434, 629 S.E.2d 642, 648 (2006). "A court considering summary judgment neither makes factual determinations nor considers the merits of competing testimony; however, summary judgment is completely appropriate when a properly supported motion sets forth facts that remain undisputed or are contested in a deficient manner." David, 367 S.C. at 250, 626 S.E.2d at 5. Summary judgment "must not be granted until the opposing party has had a full and fair opportunity to complete discovery. Nonetheless, the nonmoving party must demonstrate the likelihood that further discovery will uncover additional relevant evidence and that the party is 'not merely engaged in a "fishing expedition."'" Dawkins v. Fields, 354 S.C. 58, 69, 580 S.E.2d 433, 439 (2003) (quoting Baughman, 306 S.C. at 112, 410 S.E.2d at 544) (internal citation omitted).
LAW/ANALYSIS
I. Incomplete Discovery
Guinan contends discovery was incomplete because Hilton Head Regional failed to produce x-rays until the day of the summary judgment hearing and he had not received the emergency telephone records from Hilton Head Regional or the phone company.[4] We disagree.
In Dawkins v. Fields, 354 S.C. 58, 71, 580 S.E.2d 433, 439-40 (2003), our supreme court rejected Dawkins' "argument that summary judgment was premature because they did not have a full and fair opportunity for discovery." A party claiming summary judgment is premature because they have not been provided a full and fair opportunity to conduct discovery must advance a good reason why the time was insufficient under the facts of the case, and why further discovery would uncover additional relevant evidence and create a genuine issue of material fact. Id. at 71, 580 S.E.2d at 439-40.
Here, Guinan alleges the phone records would reveal how long the blood thinner was administered, and the x-rays would prove Guinan did not have any vascular problem early on, leaving epidural hematoma as the only possible diagnosis. However, the length of time the blood thinner was administered had no adverse effect on Guinan's condition. Accordingly, we believe the master did not err in hearing the defendants' summary judgment motion because the discovery deadlines had expired and Guinan was afforded a full and fair opportunity to conduct discovery. Moreover, on appeal, Guinan fails to demonstrate further discovery would uncover additional relevant evidence or create a genuine issue of material fact.
II. Gupta's Testimony
Guinan maintains the master erred in granting the defendants' general summary judgment motion when Gupta's testimony "clearly implicated" the defendants in deviations from the standard of care. We disagree.
A physician commits malpractice by not exercising that degree of skill and learning that is ordinarily possessed and exercised by members of the profession in good standing acting in the same or similar circumstances. Additionally, medical malpractice lawsuits have specific requirements that must be satisfied in order for a genuine factual issue to exist. Specifically, a plaintiff alleging medical malpractice must provide evidence showing (1) the generally recognized and accepted practices and procedures that would be followed by average, competent practitioners in the defendants' field of medicine under the same or similar circumstances, and (2) that the defendants departed from the recognized and generally accepted standards. Also, the plaintiff must show that the defendants' departure from such generally recognized practices and procedures was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's alleged injuries and damages. The plaintiff must provide expert testimony to establish both the required standard of care and the defendants' failure to conform to that standard, unless the subject matter lies within the ambit of common knowledge so that no special learning is required to evaluate the conduct of the defendants.
(parts omitted)
Gupta testified he did not have any criticisms of how Zitello administered the cervical epidural steroid injection. However, when asked what he would have done if he had been in Zitello's position, he replied:
A: If I get a call from a physician regarding just the chest pain itself, I would rather tell them to go ahead with the cardiac even to work. But I would certainly ask him if the patient is having any shooting pain in the upper extremities, or is he developing any weakness in the leg. In that event, I would tell the physician who's calling me that I will be right over, and I will see the patient myself.
Q: And that would be the standard of care?
A: That would be my standard of care.
Q: You think that would be the standard of care for someone in your profession that's doing this?
A: I think so.
We find summary judgment was proper because Guinan failed to provide evidence, through his expert witness, showing the defendants departed from the recognized and generally accepted standards of average, competent practitioners in their field of medicine under the same or similar circumstances. The most damaging portion of Gupta's testimony is his statement that Zitello deviated from Gupta's personal standard of care; however, we do not find that testimony sufficient to withstand summary judgment because it does not state Zitello deviated from the generally accepted standard of care. More importantly, Guinan failed to show defendants' alleged departure from the generally recognized practices and procedures was the proximate cause of his injuries.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the master-in-equity is
AFFIRMED.
THOMAS and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
In The Court of Appeals
Robert Guinan, Appellant, v. Tenet Healthsystems of Hilton Head, Inc, et al., Respondents.
FACTS
Guinan suffered from neck, shoulder, and other pain, and received epidural injections of pain medication in his cervical spine on March 13, 2002, from Dr. Philip James Zitello (Zitello). After the injection, Guinan began experiencing chest pains and weakness in his legs. As a result, Guinan contacted Dr. Gaston O. Perez (Perez), his family physician. Perez examined Guinan, administered some medications, and instructed Guinan to go to the emergency room at Hilton Head Regional Medical Center (Hilton Head Regional).[2] Perez contacted the emergency room and explained Guinan's relevant medical history. Additionally, Perez contacted Zitello, and Zitello agreed to meet Perez and Guinan at the emergency room.
Perez admitted Guinan into the emergency room and ordered a neurology consult. Dr. Harvinder Kohli (Kohli) performed the neurology consult and ordered the administration of a blood thinner to treat a suspected spinal cord occlusion or clot. Kohli called Memorial Health University Medical Center (Memorial Health) in Savannah, Georgia, to discuss the case with a neurosurgeon and spoke with Dr. James Lindley (Lindley).[3] Lindley suspected Guinan's symptoms were related to a hematoma (or a bleed), rather than a clot. As a result, the blood thinner was discontinued, and Guinan was transported to Memorial Health. Upon arrival, Guinan was given a MRI, which revealed the presence of a hematoma in Guinan's cervical and thoracic spine. Lindley successfully evacuated the hematoma.
Guinan brought a medical malpractice action against Hilton Head Regional, Kohli, and Zitello. Guinan alleged Hilton Head Regional: (1) failed to properly diagnose the hematoma; (2) failed to properly administer drugs; (3) administered drugs known to be or should have known to be dangerous to Guinan; (4) failed to warn Guinan of the danger presented by the drugs; (5) failed to require Zitello to be present in the emergency room; (6) failed to obtain a neurological consult; (7) failed to exercise the degree of care required of physicians in an emergency room setting; (8) failed to have proper diagnostic equipment available; and (9) failed to immediately transfer Guinan to Memorial Health for emergency care. As to Kohli, Guinan asserted he: (1) failed to properly diagnose the hematoma; (2) failed to properly treat Guinan; (3) increased the harm to Guinan by administering drugs he knew or should have known would harm Guinan; (4) failed to consult a neurosurgeon prior to administering the blood thinner; (5) failed to exercise the degree of care required by the circumstances; and (6) failed to immediately transfer Guinan to Memorial Health for emergency care. Lastly, Guinan claimed Zitello: (1) failed to properly administer the epidural injection; (2) failed to recognize the symptoms of a failed epidural injection; (3) failed to warn and inform Guinan of the symptoms of an epidural injection and warn Guinan of possible paralysis; (4) failed to attend to Guinan at the emergency room; (5) failed to see that Guinan was immediately sent to surgery; (6) failed to exercise the degree of care required of physicians in the profession; and (7) failed to warn and inform Guinan of the risks of an epidural hematoma and other risks of the epidural injection.
The first scheduling order in this case was dated September 7, 2005, and provided an April 15, 2006, discovery deadline. On May 26, 2006, an amended scheduling order was issued extending the deadline to June 1, 2006. After a motions hearing on July 12, 2006, a final scheduling order was issued extending the deadlines for another forty days. The scheduling order also stated the defendants could not file motions for summary judgment until the expiration of the discovery deadlines.
On October 2, 2006, after the discovery deadlines had expired, the master heard the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Sixteen days later, the master issued an order granting the defendants' motion. The master found Gupta testified he was not an expert in the field of neurology or emergency medicine; had never been involved in the diagnosis and treatment of a patient with spinal hematoma; had no criticisms of the nursing staff at the emergency room, or of Kohli; stated Kohli administered the standard of care relative to the care and treatment of Guinan; did not have any material experience in an emergency room in the United States; was unwilling to comment on the performance of emergency room physicians; and did not offer any opinion that any act of the defendants was the proximate cause of any of Guinan's injuries.
Additionally, the master found the time for discovery had expired, and Guinan had a full and fair opportunity to complete discovery. Accordingly, the master granted defendants' motion for summary judgment because Guinan was without expert testimony to create a genuine issue of material fact with respect to his claims of medical negligence against the defendants. This appeal followed.
Standard of Review
"Since it is a drastic remedy, summary judgment 'should be cautiously invoked so that no person will be improperly deprived of a trial of the disputed factual issues.'" Baughman v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 306 S.C. 101, 112, 410 S.E.2d 537, 543 (1991) (quoting Watson v. S. Ry. Co., 420 F. Supp. 483, 486 (D.S.C. 1975)). An appellate court reviews the grant of summary judgment under the same standard applied by the circuit court. David v. McLeod Reg'l Med. Ctr., 367 S.C. 242, 247, 626 S.E.2d 1, 3 (2006). The circuit court should grant summary judgment "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Rule 56(c), SCRCP. In determining whether any triable issues of fact exist, the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom must be viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Law v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 368 S.C. 424, 434, 629 S.E.2d 642, 648 (2006). "A court considering summary judgment neither makes factual determinations nor considers the merits of competing testimony; however, summary judgment is completely appropriate when a properly supported motion sets forth facts that remain undisputed or are contested in a deficient manner." David, 367 S.C. at 250, 626 S.E.2d at 5. Summary judgment "must not be granted until the opposing party has had a full and fair opportunity to complete discovery. Nonetheless, the nonmoving party must demonstrate the likelihood that further discovery will uncover additional relevant evidence and that the party is 'not merely engaged in a "fishing expedition."'" Dawkins v. Fields, 354 S.C. 58, 69, 580 S.E.2d 433, 439 (2003) (quoting Baughman, 306 S.C. at 112, 410 S.E.2d at 544) (internal citation omitted).
LAW/ANALYSIS
I. Incomplete Discovery
Guinan contends discovery was incomplete because Hilton Head Regional failed to produce x-rays until the day of the summary judgment hearing and he had not received the emergency telephone records from Hilton Head Regional or the phone company.[4] We disagree.
In Dawkins v. Fields, 354 S.C. 58, 71, 580 S.E.2d 433, 439-40 (2003), our supreme court rejected Dawkins' "argument that summary judgment was premature because they did not have a full and fair opportunity for discovery." A party claiming summary judgment is premature because they have not been provided a full and fair opportunity to conduct discovery must advance a good reason why the time was insufficient under the facts of the case, and why further discovery would uncover additional relevant evidence and create a genuine issue of material fact. Id. at 71, 580 S.E.2d at 439-40.
Here, Guinan alleges the phone records would reveal how long the blood thinner was administered, and the x-rays would prove Guinan did not have any vascular problem early on, leaving epidural hematoma as the only possible diagnosis. However, the length of time the blood thinner was administered had no adverse effect on Guinan's condition. Accordingly, we believe the master did not err in hearing the defendants' summary judgment motion because the discovery deadlines had expired and Guinan was afforded a full and fair opportunity to conduct discovery. Moreover, on appeal, Guinan fails to demonstrate further discovery would uncover additional relevant evidence or create a genuine issue of material fact.
II. Gupta's Testimony
Guinan maintains the master erred in granting the defendants' general summary judgment motion when Gupta's testimony "clearly implicated" the defendants in deviations from the standard of care. We disagree.
A physician commits malpractice by not exercising that degree of skill and learning that is ordinarily possessed and exercised by members of the profession in good standing acting in the same or similar circumstances. Additionally, medical malpractice lawsuits have specific requirements that must be satisfied in order for a genuine factual issue to exist. Specifically, a plaintiff alleging medical malpractice must provide evidence showing (1) the generally recognized and accepted practices and procedures that would be followed by average, competent practitioners in the defendants' field of medicine under the same or similar circumstances, and (2) that the defendants departed from the recognized and generally accepted standards. Also, the plaintiff must show that the defendants' departure from such generally recognized practices and procedures was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's alleged injuries and damages. The plaintiff must provide expert testimony to establish both the required standard of care and the defendants' failure to conform to that standard, unless the subject matter lies within the ambit of common knowledge so that no special learning is required to evaluate the conduct of the defendants.
(parts omitted)
Gupta testified he did not have any criticisms of how Zitello administered the cervical epidural steroid injection. However, when asked what he would have done if he had been in Zitello's position, he replied:
A: If I get a call from a physician regarding just the chest pain itself, I would rather tell them to go ahead with the cardiac even to work. But I would certainly ask him if the patient is having any shooting pain in the upper extremities, or is he developing any weakness in the leg. In that event, I would tell the physician who's calling me that I will be right over, and I will see the patient myself.
Q: And that would be the standard of care?
A: That would be my standard of care.
Q: You think that would be the standard of care for someone in your profession that's doing this?
A: I think so.
We find summary judgment was proper because Guinan failed to provide evidence, through his expert witness, showing the defendants departed from the recognized and generally accepted standards of average, competent practitioners in their field of medicine under the same or similar circumstances. The most damaging portion of Gupta's testimony is his statement that Zitello deviated from Gupta's personal standard of care; however, we do not find that testimony sufficient to withstand summary judgment because it does not state Zitello deviated from the generally accepted standard of care. More importantly, Guinan failed to show defendants' alleged departure from the generally recognized practices and procedures was the proximate cause of his injuries.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the master-in-equity is
AFFIRMED.
THOMAS and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)