MEDICAL MALPRACTICE & WRONGFUL DEATH- Ariana K. Politis
Ariana K. Politis successfully obtained summary judgment in this potentially high-value medical malpractice and wrongful death action which involved allegations of failure to timely and properly diagnose pancreatic cancer in a 36-year old female. In this case, the plaintiff’s decedent presented to a Nassau County hospital Emergency Room with complaints of jaundice and severe fatigue. Our client, a Board-Certified Diagnostic Radiologist, was called to read an MRI of the abdomen without contrast to rule out malignancy, amongst other things. While there were noted abnormalities, no appreciable mass was seen in the pancreas. Nonetheless, the results were appropriately discussed with the on-call team and recommendations for further workup were relayed. Ultimately, the decedent would go on to be diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 1.5 years later, and she passed away one year after diagnosis.
In support of her summary judgment motion, Ariana K. Politis utilized the Expert Affirmation of a Board-Certified Diagnostic Radiologist, who opined that our client conformed at all times with the applicable standard of care required of a radiologist. In that regard, the Expert opined that there was no appreciable mass on the imaging read by our client. The Expert also opined that it was not unusual for pancreatic cancer to appear and develop in such an aggressive manner as in this case. The type of pancreatic cancer the decedent was diagnosed with accounts for just 1-2% of all pancreatic cancers. The Expert opined that MRI is the gold standard in diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, pancreatic cancer has extremely low survival rates because it is typically diagnosed in its advanced stages.
The Court found that our client established a prima facie right to judgment as a matter of law. The Court held that our Expert affirmation addressed each of the pertinent departures alleged in the Complaint and Bill of Particulars, and was adequately supported by the record. The Court further found that in response, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact warranting a trial.
