SKETCHES OF COURT: Jury finds no malpractice in infant delivery suit
In this courtroom sketch, Hon. Carolyn Wade listens as defendant’s attorney Laura Shapiro (standing), of the law firm McAloon & Friedman, addresses the jury in the medical malpractice trial Laszlo v. Roth.
Timea Laszlo claims that she sustained an injury during the delivery of her baby, and is suing her obstetrician-gynecologist for, she alleges, causing a tear in her anal sphincter muscle. Lazlo was represented by Erica Sattler (at left), of counsel to the law firm Harmon, Linder & Rogowsky.
Shapiro countered that the claim of a tear was based on a sonogram that was taken five months after the March 2012 delivery and, she alleges, shows no evidence of a tear but of a small abnormality common to birth mothers. Shapiro maintains that at the time of delivery, Dr. Diana Roth did a thorough examination and found no injury. Shapiro further alleges that the plaintiff’s claims, inclusive of incontinence, were not supported in records of several months’ follow-up medical visits.
Sattler alleges that the defendant doctor was aware of her client’s increased risk for an anal sphincter tear, based on Laszlo’s previous medical history and in light of a delivery expedited by the use of a vacuum device. Sattler maintains that the doctor was guilty of negligence when she failed to find the alleged tear, and that her client has lasting injuries. Laszlo was consequently advised on surgical repair, but declined in consideration of whether the risks outweighed the benefits. Sattler maintains that her client will likely need surgery in the future.
The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, finding no negligence in the trial that concluded in Kings County Civil Term.
Leave a Comment
Leave a Comment