A doctor is facing complaints after a man was left with holes in his chest muscle and later died due to cosmetic procedure, according to the Florida Department of Health.
The administrative complaint against the Fort Lauderdale doctor claims that “the patient ultimately died as a result” of the liposuction, which allegedly left perforations throughout the 58-year-old’s chest. The procedure involved VASER, a type of ultrasound with vibration amplification of sound at resonance in January 2021. The patient then returned in 2022 “for a repeat,” according to reporting from the Miami Herald this week.
Repetitive VASER-assisted liposuction comes with risks such as infection, bleeding, never damage and scarring, which can cause perforation. The complaint alleges that the doctor “failed to document any discussion” with the patient about the additional risks associated with a repeated procedure.
Two days after the second procedure, the patient was taken to a local hospital and was diagnosed with severe sepsis. He died a day later.
A medical examiner found several perforations in the man’s gallbladder, small intestines, chest muscle and abdominal muscle.
The doctor’s insurance company paid $250,000 to the victim’s family, according to insurance documents and local media reporting. The claim was settled within the pre-suit period, meaning a settlement was reached before a formal lawsuit was filed.
Medical Malpractice
As outlined in Florida Statute § 766.102, medical malpractice occurs when a medical provider deviates from the standard of care, resulting in an injury to a patient. Leesfield & Partners has several attorneys dedicated to this practice area, regularly securing favorable results for patients and grieving families affected by a medical professional’s subpar care.
In Florida, there is a two-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases, meaning that a claim must be brought within two years from the date of the incident or within two years of when the patient, family member, or patient’s guardian knew or should have known of the injury due to the medical professional’s negligence, as specified in Florida Statute § 95.11(4)(b). However, there is recourse for patients via the four-year statute of repose. Under this legal principle, the statute of limitations is extended to four years after the incident if the patient has not discovered the result of the medical malpractice within the two-year window. Similarly, the seven-year statute of repose applies in cases involving fraud, concealment, or purposeful misrepresentation by the at-fault medical professional. This statute of repose further extends the window in which the patient may file a claim, accounting for the delayed diagnosis or discovery of the injury. To extend the statute of repose to seven years, a plaintiff would need evidence that the medical professional knew about the condition and purposefully concealed that knowledge or failed to communicate it to the patient.
For minors, the statute of limitations is extended until the minor turns 8 years old.
Leesfield & Partners: A History of Representing Injured Patients
Leesfield & Partners has represented the victims of medical negligence for over four decades, securing the best possible outcome for patients whose lives have been forever changed due to a medical professional’s carelessness. When a doctor, nurse or other medical staff member’s negligence results in an injury to a person, that injury can trickle down to impact nearly every aspect of that person’s life. Everything from their occupation, social life and mental health can fall to the wayside as they cope with the pain and circumstances they are left to deal with as the result of the injury.
In 48 years of personal injury practice, Leesfield & Partners has handled numerous cases of individuals injured due to a medical professional’s negligence. These medical professionals can be doctors, nurses, dentists, cruise ship doctors and other medical staff entrusted to treat medical emergencies and other conditions.
In a record verdict out of Seminole County, Florida, Leesfield & Partners attorneys secured $24.1 million for the family of a laboring mother and child injured due to a doctor’s controversial birthing techniques. The case involved a Central Florida obstetrician who was delivering out client’s child, a several-days-long ordeal that had permanent consequences. The other was given Pitocin, a drug used as a catalyst in labor to initiate or speed up contractions. When the drug did not work, the obstetrician on call that day used a vacuum extractor for over 45 minutes before ordering a nurse to apply fundal pressure. This technique, which can result in the rupture of the uterus, involves pushing on the stomach of the mother to squeeze the child down the birth canal.
Tragically, the mother’s uterus ruptured in this case, stopping the blood and oxygen supply to the baby. As a result of prolonged oxygen deprivation, the child was born with severe cerebral palsy.
Another traumatic birth case handled by Leesfield & partners resulted in an over $10 million recovery amount secured for a family.
Leesfield & Partners previously secured an $8.8 million settlement for a 34-year-old woman for negligent medical care and treatment.
In a cruise ship medical malpractice case that resulted in the multi-digital and feet amputations of a 9-month-old due to a medical staff’s failure to diagnose and treat meningitis, Leesfield & Partners obtained a multi-million recovery for the family.
For a 39-year-old wife and mother of two, Leesfield & Partners, along with Chicago co-counsel, Patricia Bobb, obtained a $4.3 million settlement. The negligent doctors in this case failed to treat a brain cyst, which resulted in brain herniation, cardiac arrest and the death of the 39-year-old woman.
The firm previously handled a neonatal neglect case involving the amputation of a premature baby’s hand. The incident occurred when an IV was wrongly inserted into an artery, rather than the baby’s vein, when the baby was in the neonatal unit of the hospital.
Leesfield & Partners secured a $2.5 million settlement in that case.