Fertile v. St. Michael’s Medical Center

779 A.2d 1078 (2001)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Fertile (P) was admitted to St. Michael's (D) experiencing labor. Holgado, a second-year resident, examined P and found her labor progressing satisfactorily. At his 9 p.m. examination, Holgado observed that P's cervix had stopped dilating, probably because of fetal-pelvic disproportion, a condition in which the mother's pelvis cannot accommodate the size of the baby. The baby showed no signs of distress and Holgado recommended to Rosenzweig, the attending physician, that P deliver by c-section. Holgado asked Buontempo (another second-year resident) to follow P while he performed a c-section on another patient. Holgado advised of his plans to perform a c-section. Buontempo reviewed P's charts. Buontempo testified that the fetal monitor revealed prolonged reduced heart rate and beat-to-beat variability evidencing an impaired oxygen supply. At 9:40 p.m., because P was fully dilated and the baby's head was at the vaginal opening, Buontempo concluded that a caesarian section was no longer an appropriate option and that the baby had to be delivered vaginally. Buontempo summoned assistance. Danielle was large, and her shoulder was wedged behind P pubic bone. Buontempo freed the baby by changing P's position, pressing on her pubic bone, and enlarging the surgical incision to expand her vagina. Danialie was injured, resulting in an atrophied and partially paralyzed arm. Ps filed a complaint alleging malpractice in that Buontempo delivered Danialie vaginally when a caesarean (c-section) section was indicated. A battle of the experts ensued. Danialie is unable to move her right hand, thumb or fingers but can place a light object in her right hand and hold it there; her condition will not improve. A jury awarded Danialie damages in the amount of $15 million and P damages in the amount of $3 million. Ds filed a motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, a remittitur. The court concluded that the verdict was excessive and remitted $10 million of the $15-million-dollar award to Danialie and all but $250,000 of the award to P, on the condition that Ps accept that amount. Otherwise, defendants would be entitled to a new damages trial. Ps agreed to the remittitur order. Ds appealed, arguing entitlement to a new trial on all issues. Ps cross-appealed, arguing that the remittitur should not have been granted at all and that the original damage award to Danialie was not excessive in light of her injuries. The Appellate Division ruled that P's emotional distress claim was insufficient as a matter of law and should have been dismissed prior to submission of the case to the jury. It then remanded the case for a new trial on all issues regarding Danialie. Ps filed a petition for certification challenging that portion of the Appellate Division judgment that remanded the case for a new trial on all issues.