Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Colon cancer is a type of cancer that affects the large intestine (colon), which is located at the bottom of the digestive system. Rectal cancer is cancer of the colon’s last six inches. They are referred to collectively as colorectal cancers. Nearly 150,000 men and women are diagnosed with colorectal cancer in the United States each year. Colorectal cancer, also known as colon cancer, can affect both men and women and is the second most lethal type of cancer in the United States. Colon cancer is treatable with proper screening and diagnosis. It is even preventable in many cases.

Unfortunately, many patients suffer as a result of a doctor’s negligence. Cancer is sometimes diagnosed too late, which can result in a much worse prognosis. If you believe you have been harmed as a result of a failure to diagnose colon cancer, contact the medical malpractice lawyers at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano for a free case evaluation. Our experienced cancer malpractice attorneys may be able to assist patients in seeking accountability and fair compensation for colon cancer misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis. We have offices in several convenient locations throughout Upstate New York. Our extensive experience in the field of medical malpractice is reflected in the outcomes we have obtained for our clients.

Colon cancer frequently begins as a small, noncancerous group of cells known as polyps. These cells develop within the colon. These polyps can become cancerous over time. Because the polyps are small, they do not cause many symptoms. Most doctors recommend annual cancer screenings to detect and remove polyps before they develop into cancer. The removal of a polyp before it becomes malignant prevents the polyp from developing into colorectal cancer. This is why procedures like colonoscopy can help prevent the development of colorectal cancer. Furthermore, colonoscopy allows colorectal cancer to be detected early before it has spread to other organs or tissue in the body. The difference in outcome is significant. The National Cancer Institute reports five-year survival rates of more than 90% when cancer is detected before it spreads and, tragically, less than 10% when cancer is detected after it has spread.

Losing weight is hard. Many people yo-yo diet for decades, ending up heavier than when they began. Many people suffering from obesity have turned to bariatric surgery to lose weight, including procedures such as gastric bypass, gastric sleeve, and lap band surgeries. These bariatric procedures have many risks involved and should be performed only on people who are significantly overweight and who have exhausted other weight loss options.  Gastric bypass is an umbrella term that describes several different types of surgeries. All of them share a basic similarity. The surgeon staples or reroutes the stomach so that a person loses weight. Often, the surgery causes a person to feel full much faster than they otherwise would. The surgery also causes food to bypass parts of the small intestines so that it is not absorbed. This malabsorption reduces the number of calories a person consumes.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans each year undergo gastric bypass surgery, either performed laparoscopically or through a large incision in the abdomen. This surgery carries risks, like all surgery. They also present the possibility of significant complications such as gastritis, bowel obstruction, hemorrhage, bleeding, anastomotic ulcers, anastomotic strictures, and hernia. All surgeries also present a risk of bacterial contamination, which may result in a severe and immediate infection.  Some surgeons neglect patients after the operation and fail to note complications.  Preventable gastric bypass surgery errors have led to disastrous, even permanently life-altering consequences.

Tragically, many of those who turn to bariatric procedures such as gastric bypass surgery suffer severe medical setbacks or lose their lives due to medical negligence. In either case, victims and their families can suffer financial, physical, and emotional challenges, with medical bills mounting and complications worsening. To account for these extensive losses and damages, injured patients and/or their families may file bariatric surgery lawsuits to seek fair compensation for their injuries.  Patients who have been catastrophically injured because of preventable gastric bypass errors may be entitled to pursue compensation for injuries or complications that result from medical negligence. If you believe you have been injured because of preventable gastric bypass errors, contact the medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano for a review of your case.  We help clients throughout the Upstate New York area with offices in multiple convenient locations. Our extensive experience in the medical malpractice field is reflected in the results we have achieved for our clients.

Bacterial meningitis is a rare but potentially fatal disease. Several types of bacteria can cause an upper respiratory tract infection and then travel through the bloodstream to the brain. The disease can also occur when certain bacteria invade the meninges directly. Bacterial meningitis can cause stroke, hearing loss, and permanent brain damage.  Bacterial meningitis causes inflammation around the membranes of the brain and spinal cord due to a bacterial infection. This inflammation leads to increased intracranial pressure and can cause a catastrophic brain injury or death if the patient does not quickly receive proper medical treatment.  However, most people recover from bacterial meningitis if it is diagnosed and treated quickly.  If you were harmed by bacterial meningitis and you suspect the harm was caused by medical malpractice, you should consult the experienced personal injury and medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano.  We help clients throughout the Upstate New York area with offices in multiple convenient locations. Our extensive experience in the medical malpractice field is reflected in the results we have achieved for our clients.

Some forms of bacterial meningitis are contagious and can be spread through contact with saliva,

nasal discharge, feces, and respiratory and throat secretions.  These are often spread through kissing, coughing, sharing drinking glasses or eating utensils, or such personal items as toothbrushes, lipstick, or cigarettes.  Outbreaks of bacterial meningitis can occur in living situations where you are in close contact with others. People sharing a household, at a daycare center, or in a classroom with an infected person can become infected. College students living in dormitories, in particular, college freshmen, have a higher risk of contracting meningococcal meningitis than college students overall. Children who have not been given routine vaccines are at increased risk of developing certain types of bacterial meningitis.

Medical malpractice cases are typically a battle between the party’s experts. As such, if the court prohibits a plaintiff’s expert from testifying, it can greatly impair their ability to establish liability. In some instances, though, a plaintiff may be able to successfully argue that their expert was improperly precluded from testifying, as shown in a recent opinion delivered in a New York medical malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to inadequate medical care, you might be owed compensation, and it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a hysterectomy that was performed by the defendant. Following the surgery, she developed necrotizing fasciitis. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant, arguing that his negligent post-surgical care constituted medical malpractice. Prior to trial, the defendant moved to preclude the plaintiff’s expert from testifying regarding the cause of her infection. The court granted the motion, and the case proceeded to trial. The jury ultimately found in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.

Grounds for Precluding Expert Testimony in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the plaintiff argued, among other things, that the trial court erred in barring her expert from offering testimony. The court agreed and ultimately reversed the trial court ruling and remanded the matter for further proceedings. In doing so, the court explained that each party must identify the person they intend to call to testify as an expert witness at trial, disclose the subject matter of their testimony, and offer their qualifications. Continue reading

Medical malpractice claims are complex, and in most instances, it is prudent for victims of medical negligence that wish to pursue claims against their healthcare providers to seek the assistance of an attorney. It is not necessary for a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case to be represented by counsel, but the decision to proceed pro se often has negative consequences. This was demonstrated recently in a case in which a New York federal court dismissed the pro se plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. If you were harmed by a doctor’s failure to comply with the standard of care, you should confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about what measures you can take to protect your interests.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff’s son was born at the defendant hospital and that he suffered an injury at birth. He was then placed in the defendant foster care center, where according to the plaintiff, the abuse continued. As such, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants in federal court, asserting claims of negligence and medical malpractice that arose under state law. He subsequently filed a petition to proceed in forma pauperis. The court granted his motion but ultimately dismissed his complaint due to a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Medical Malpractice Claims Filed in Federal Court

The court explained that federal courts have jurisdiction over a narrow range of claims. Further, they must independently determine whether they can exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a claim before evaluating its merits. In other words, Congress only granted the federal courts original jurisdiction over matters in which the plaintiff asserts a federal question or where there the case involves citizens of different states, and the amount in controversy and jurisdictional requirements are met.   Continue reading