Published on:

Jones v. Crawforth (147 Idaho 11, 205 P.3d 660)

Idaho-nursing-home-abuse-elderly-woman-300x200Articles: Idaho

Jones v. Crawforth (147 Idaho 11, 205 P.3d 660)

CASE:
Jones v. Crawforth (147 Idaho 11, 205 P.3d 660)
PARTIES:
Plaintiff (Appellee) – Jones, individually and guardian of the state of Lori Jones (Deceased)
Defendant (Appellant) – Crawforth, bankruptcy trustee for B&B Autotransfusion Services
COURT:
Supreme Court of Idaho
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:

Plaintiffs filed suit against B&B Autotransfusion among others for medical malpractice and the wrongful death of Lori Jones. The trial court found for the plaintiffs on all counts, apportioning damages amongst the multiple defendants. B&B was apportioned 49% of the fault and they appealed the decision of the court.

SUMMARY OF FACTS:

On August 2, 2004, Lori Jones underwent lumbar spine surgery at HealthSouth Treasure Valley Hospital. During the surgery Dr. Thomas Lark acted as the primary anesthesiologist and Dr. Deborah Jenkins acted as the relief anesthesiologist.

Jeri Kurtz was the certified cell saver technician and was employed by B&B Autotransfusion. Kurtz was responsible for gathering the patient’s blood during surgery and cleaning the blood in the cell saver machine before the cleaned blood was delivered from the machine back into the patient through the reinfusion bag.

During the surgery, Dr. Lark took a break, leaving Dr. Jenkins in charge. Dr. Jenkins sought to speed up the reinfusion process and placed a pressure cuff on the reinfusion bag despite there being a warning on the bag specifically cautioning against applying a pressure cuff. Dr. Kurtz did not say anything to Dr. Jenkins at that time. Dr. Lark then returned to the operating room.  When Dr. Kurtz notice the blood had completely emptied from the reinfusion bag, she alerted Dr. Lark. Dr. Lark then realized there was air going in the line going into Lori and this was a big problem. Attempts at resuscitation failed and Lori Jones died from a fatal air embolism.

OUTCOME AT TRIAL:

The jury returned a special verdict apportioning fault to (1) Jeri Kurtz (B&B)- 49%; (2) Dr. Jenkins- 36%; and (3) Dr. Lark- 15%. The jury also found the conduct of both Dr. Kurtz and Dr. Jenkins was “reckless.” Final judgment against B&B was $2,945,920.67.

ISSUES ON APPEAL:

Was expert testimony of two out- of- state medical experts, regarding what conduct they would characterize as reaching a level of negligence that they saw as reckless, properly admitted?

SUPREME COURT HOLDINGS:
Yes
RELEVANT APPLICATION OF LAW:
“The admissibility of expert testimony is a matter committed to the discretion of the trial court, and the court’s ruling will not be overturned absent an abuse of that discretion.”

  • Athay v. Stacey, 142 Idaho 360, 366, 128 P.3d 897, 903 (2005)

Client Reviews

  • Having worked in the medical field, I appreciated the way that Mr. Rosenfeld and his staff approached my family’s situation. The combination of medical knowledge and legal expertise was indeed the winning combination for our case.
    ★★★★★
  • While nothing can change the way our mother was treated at a nursing facility, I do feel a sense of vindication that the facility was forced to pay for their treatment. I am certain that they would never have done had my attorneys not held their feet to the fire.
    ★★★★★
  • I was very nervous about initiating a claim against my mother’s nursing facility, but Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers took care of everything from getting the medical records to going to court. I felt like I had real advocates on my side. That meant a lot to me.
    ★★★★★
  • After a horrific episode at a nursing home, my sister and I spoke to a number of law firms. No one took the time to answer our questions and explain the legal process like Mr. Rosenfeld. He did a tremendous job on our case and I can see why he’s earned the praise he has from clients and peers.
    ★★★★★
  • I liked the fact that I could call the office and ask questions about the legal process at anytime. I could tell that my case was in good hands. I think that this was reflected in my father’s settlement was more than I anticipated the case ever being worth.
    ★★★★★