Lawyers at DBMS successfully litigate a wide variety of civil cases and argue appeals in some of the most challenging jurisdictions in the country.
Gibbons v. Urologist
Defendant Urologist
Outcome:Defense Verdict
Plaintiff, a disabled iron worker, underwent a surgical procedure performed by the defendant, a urologist. Defendant diagnosed the plaintiff with bladder stones and an enlarged prostate, which conditions contributed to plaintiff’s urinary symptoms.
Before the surgery, plaintiff complained of urinary urge incontinence and blood in the urine. Plaintiff testified that immediately after surgery, his urinary incontinence was greatly exacerbated, requiring him to wear adult diapers until he underwent a corrective surgery by a subsequent treating urologist.
Plaintiff alleged that defendant’s surgery was not indicated and that defendant failed to perform a cystometrogram before surgery. According to plaintiff’s expert, if defendant had performed a cystometrogram before surgery, he would have diagnosed the plaintiff with a neurogenic bladder and would not have treated him surgically.
The defendant contended that the development of the plaintiff’s bladder stones proved that the plaintiff had an obstructive prostate which needed to be surgically resected.
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant.