The Damage Control comedy team has done parody ads under the titles Neglect, Nursing Home, Personal Injury, Sexual Harassment, and Sue Somebody. (h/t: Nicole Black).

Immigrant advocacy groups are filing a complaint with the New York attorney general’s office naming 16 pharmacies in Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island, claiming “that federal civil rights law and state health regulations require pharmacies to provide linguistic help” to “people who speak little or no English”. “That assistance should include interpreters at pharmacies and written translations of medication instructions, the advocates say.” The advocacy groups are New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, the New York Immigration Coalition and Make the Road New York.

It seems a creative reinterpretation of “national origin discrimination” has been going on for some time:

Health advocates have increasingly used federal civil rights law to push hospitals, nursing homes and clinics to provide language services. Language barriers to health services constitute discrimination based on national origin, they argue, a violation of federal civil rights law, which applies to hospitals because they receive federal funds through Medicare and other programs.

The latest effort aims to expand similar requirements to pharmacies.

As of the year 2000, according to one report, 138 languages were known to be spoken in the borough of Queens alone. (Anne Barnard, “Non-English Speakers Charge Bias in Prescription Labeling”, New York Times, Oct. 31).

No need to worry that greeters will be foisting cookies on returning soldiers at Bangor International Airport any more: “airport officials asked the greeters to stop serving food last month because of concern about liability and food safety. ‘We just say, “We’re sorry, we can’t give out any cookies,”‘ said Bill Knight, a World War II veteran who founded the group.” (Katie Zezima, “Airport Tries to Rein In Greeters’ Generosity Toward Troops”, New York Times, Jun. 21). Other food menaces averted: Dec. 13, 1999 (homemade pies), Jan. 29, 2001 (school cookies, country fair pies and jams), Feb. 1-3, 2002, Jan. 18 and Apr. 28, 2007 (figurines in New Orleans king cake), Apr. 15, 2004 (potluck dinners), Jul. 18, 2006 (homemade baked goods in U.K. nursing home), and Apr. 28, 2007 (candy-wrapped toy).

In West Palm Beach, Fla., a jury has held a nursing home liable for resuscitating a 92-year-old Alzheimer’s patient who had signed an advance directive indicating that she did not want to be kept alive by artificial means. And although an obstacle to even an otherwise well-founded “wrongful resuscitation” case might be the question of damages, the jury in this case awarded the estate of Madeline Neumann $150,000. (Rebecca Riddick, “Fla. Nursing Home Faulted for Ignoring End-of-Life Wishes”, Daily Business Review, Mar. 20; CourtTV coverage). An attorney for the physician defendant (who, unlike the nursing home, was found not liable in the case) said that despite do-not-resuscitate orders, medical personnel often make a judgment that a patient could potentially benefit from rescue efforts, and that had they failed to make such an effort in Mrs. Neumann’s case they might have faced legal risk: “If you call 911, you get sued,” he says. “If you don’t call, you get sued.” (Laura Parker, “In a crisis, do-not-revive requests don’t always work”, USA Today, Dec. 19, 2006).

Tampa-based Wilkes & McHugh, which has enjoyed much success filing suits against nursing homes in many states, “is now on the defense end of a suit that contends the firm knowingly violated Tennessee law regarding contingency fees.” Former client Debbie Howard, who hired the firm to sue a Memphis nursing home, says it “engaged in an unlawful scheme to collect 40 percent or 45 percent in contingency fees of settlement amounts, although Tennessee law caps fees to 33 and 1/3 percent in medical malpractice cases. The complaint says the law firm charged the higher and unlawful contingency fee to hundreds of clients in Tennessee.” In its response, the law firm says the complaint is “scurrilous” and based on falsehoods, and says Howard never appealed a Tennessee court order approving the fees. (Liz Freeman, “Tampa law firm faces contingency fees lawsuit”, Naples (Fla.) News, Jan. 14; Scott Barancik, “Firm gets a taste of dish it serves”, St. Petersburg Times, Feb. 17). For more on the law firm, see Mar. 13-14, 2001, Jul. 6, 2005, and Jun. 22, 2006, as well as Scott Barancik, “Law firm’s success against nursing homes has a price”, St. Petersburg Times, Jul. 24, 2004.

In Great Britain, a nursing home spokeswoman explains why visitors are allowed to bring in cakes and other baked goods only when they’re store-bought, not homemade. (Nanny Knows Best (U.K.), Jun. 14)(via Nobody’s Business). Other food menaces averted: Dec. 13, 1999 (homemade pies), Jan. 29, 2001 (cookies), Feb. 1-3, 2002 (figurines in New Orleans king cake), Apr. 15, 2004 (potluck dinners).

[84-year-old Loren] Richards died on March 2, 2002, at Beverly Health and Rehabilitation of Frankfort.

Richards’ daughter, Wanda Delaplane, sued the home, alleging that nurses had ignored her father’s repeated calls for help with abdominal pain. With an impacted bowel, he later died of a heart attack and a blood clot in his left lung.

The home argued that Richards had a heart attack because he had smoked for years and had severely blocked arteries. The Kentucky jury also awarded $200,000 for failing to immediately notify the family of a downward turn in Richards’ health. The Richards family had asked for over $150 million in total damages. Delaplane is an attorney with the Kentucky Attorney General’s office, so you know which government agency not to complain to when nursing home expenses go through the roof because of the liability insurance costs. (Greg Kocher, “Man’s estate to get $20 million”, Lexington Herald-Leader, May 5; Greg Kocher, “Nursing home provided proper care, attorney says in closing arguments”, Lexington Herald-Leader, May 3; Steve Lannen, “Nursing home sued for $155 million”, Lexington Herald-Leader, Mar. 23).

The family of Tranquilino Mendoza agrees that he received good care from a nursing home, until he was paired with a mentally ill roommate, who beat Mendoza with his fists and a water pitcher, the thirtieth time or so he had assaulted someone at the home. Mendoza recovered from his injuries, and died less than three years later from unrelated causes. The jury felt that his estate deserved $160 million in damages. Liability may be appropriate (it’s unclear from the press coverage what the nursing home could have done differently, since the roommate had to be placed somewhere), but the damages figure appears off by three orders of magnitude. (Sheila Hotchkin, “Jury awards $160 million in nursing home suit”, San Antonio Express-News, Feb. 23).

Walter’s entry on the Florida Senate race calls to mind that one of the ironies of the Democratic Party’s recent insistence on being the lapdog of the litigation lobby is that the latter has no special loyalty to the Democratic Party or anything that it stands for.

The most recent incarnation of this is the anti-abortion but pro-trial-lawyer Astroturf group “Center for a Just Society,” run by Ken Connor, that seeks to turn social conservatives into litigation lobby supporters by arguing that tort reform would threaten the ability of plaintiffs’ lawyers to sue RU-486 out of the market. (Connor comes from the same law firm as Jim Wilkes, who set up another Astroturf group that opposed nursing home liability reform in Florida, where liability had gotten so out of control that even the AARP supported efforts to limit ability of elders to sue nursing homes (Dec. 17, 2003).) Ramesh Ponnuru exposes the fallacies of this group’s reasoning in an article in this week’s National Review (sadly not available on line), which quotes me and mentions Walter. (Ramesh Ponnuru, “Social Injustice: Trial lawyers woo social conservatives”, National Review, Aug. 29).

62-year-old Kenneth F. Morris is both paraplegic and a schizophrenic. He refused to cooperate with the doctors and nurses at other hospitals, and when he arrived at Western Convalescent Hospital, he had infected bedsores, which eventually resulted in the amputation of his leg below the knee. A Los Angeles County jury held the nursing care facility 90% responsible for the injury, and awarded over $12 million in compensatory and punitive damages. “A spokeswoman for the California Department of Health Services, which inspects and licenses nursing homes, said state officials had never received a complaint about Morris’ injuries and had no plans to investigate.” (Jack Leonard, “Abuse Victim Wins Award”, Los Angeles Times, Jul. 2; plaintiffs’ law firm summary). The award will likely be lowered somewhat later in the litigation process, but the trial court is still likely to award between $3 and $6 million.

Loads of coverage of health matters in recent weeks over at our sister website, including: liability fears and emergency room admissions; New Jersey bans “retaliating” against expert witnesses over testimony they give, no matter how untrue it may be; Ted on one lawprof’s grossly misleading use of med-mal statistics, and a second round of the same; pain medication in nursing homes (and more on nursing homes); two doctors pick up stakes; Australian med-mal rates fall after reform; same thing in Texas; HHS introduces a distinctive “early offers” program for medical malpractice claims involving its clients; please don’t let him grow up to be an M.D.; Pennsylvania hospitals’ bill; MICRA and Prop 103; the March of Dimes wants Bendectin back; federal judge Loretta Preska in Manhattan throws out a major Dickie Scruggs case against the non-profit health sector; and a must-read article on defensive medicine. To explore all this and much more, follow the links provided or visit the site’s topical page on medicine and law.

A New Jersey nursing home defense attorney finds himself under fire after a presentation to fellow litigators at which he seemed to recommend, whether in a jocular way or not, making plaintiffs fight for every document and asserting blanket claims of privilege to keep relevant papers out of their hands. Curiously, adversaries who’ve litigated against attorney Donald Davidson tell a reporter that they consider him a straight shooter who has not used abusive or stonewalling tactics against them. (Charles Toutant, “Candid Comments About Discovery Bring Lawyer National Notoriety”, New Jersey Law Journal, Sept. 21).

In West Virginia, insurer NCRIC was paying out $1.07 in claims for every $1 in premiums collected; it almost left the state until regulators allowed them to raise rates to make up the difference. Of course, some doctors can’t afford the new rates, and have had to stop practicing at hospitals and nursing homes that require insurance. ATLA once again blames the insurance companies for failing to invest premiums in such a way to pay the rising claims. The insurer’s problems were exacerbated when a D.C. jury levied a $18 million countersuit verdict against NCRIC when it tried to collect $3 million in unpaid premiums from the defunct Columbia Hospital for Women Medical Center. (Dina ElBoghdady, “D.C. Malpractice Insurer Feels Squeeze”, Washington Post, Sep. 6).

In Illinois, the political debate continues over the need for tort reform, as doctors continue to flee the state. Ed Murnane, of the Illinois Civil Justice League, notes that 40% of the doctors in St. Clair and Madison Counties have been named as defendants in lawsuits between 2000 and 2003; even though the overwhelming majority of plaintiffs collect nothing from such cases, the costs of defense are high. (Mark Samuels, “Group: Tort Reform Can Stop Malpractice Crisis”, The Southern, Sep. 3; Rob Stroud and Herb Meeker, “Illinois physicians say insurance rates are driving them out of state”, Journal Gazette/Times-Courier, Sep. 3).

An editorial signed by 25 Washington County, Maryland doctors protests the legislature’s failure to reform the medical malpractice system. (”Lawsuits will drive doctors away”, The Herald-Mail, Sep. 5).

In Nevada, the trial lawyers groups are trying to obstruct reform by putting forward faux reform measures on the initiative ballot that would wipe out the real reform measure, Question 3. For example, Question 5, proposes penalties for filing or defending “frivolous” lawsuits–but redefines “frivolous” to narrow the classification as to be meaningless. At the same time, it bars the legislature from ever implementing caps. An earlier attempt to stop Question 3 with a last-minute lawsuit failed. (Tanya Albert, “Nevada tort reform ballot fight now brewing”, American Medical News, Sep. 13; AP, Aug. 25; No on 4 and 5 website).

Washington state doctors are traditionally politics-free, but the medical malpractice crisis could change that and force them to lobby for the reform Initiative 330. “‘Physicians in the main have an aversion to mixing politics with their professional medical practice,’ said Dr. Kevin Ware, president of the county medical society. ‘But under the current circumstances, the need for malpractice insurance reform is so desperate that physicians are having to look seriously at departing from that custom.’” (Sharon Salyer, “Doctors may lift ban on politics”, The Herald, Sep. 6; Wallace blog, Aug. 31).

Wyoming has lost 10 percent of its doctors in the last eighteen months, and the state’s largest malpractice carrier will stop renewing policies October 1. A constitutional amendment is necessary for reform there. (Lee Lockhart, “Lawmaker predicts heated debate over damage caps”, Casper Star Tribune, Aug. 27).

Evan Schaeffer, who’s poked fun before at the way plaintiff’s lawyers from elsewhere in the country endeavor to solicit business in his own Madison County, has some thoughts (Aug. 23) prompted by a Minnesota lawyer’s advertisement which includes a LOT OF CAPITAL LETTERING and which lays out a “Chinese menu” of potential complaints which might entitle the prospective client to money damages. Touchingly, the ad in the Alton, Ill. Telegraph addresses the danger that some local residents might be so unfortunate as not to be exposed to its message: “CLIP AND SAVE. Please take this notice and post it in your nursing home, church, community center or anywhere that it may reach people who are suffering and need help.”

“A Brooklyn, N.Y., judge [last month] dismissed a $112 million medical malpractice verdict — the third-largest in the state’s history — saying a local hospital could not be blamed for an aneurysm that left a man a quadriplegic. Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Melvin S. Barasch said that although the case was ‘one of the saddest’ he had heard, the jury had no rational basis for its verdict.” David Fellin’s lawyer had played the jury a “day-in-the-life” video of his disabled client “in a nursing home, where he needs constant care. He also told the jury about Fellin’s mother, whose life, according to Barasch, now revolves around visiting and caring for her son. The judge said the film ‘brought tears to everyone’s eyes.’” However, the judge said, that’s no substitute for showing that defendant Long Island College Hospital had negligently caused Fellin’s injuries, which he said the plaintiff’s side hadn’t shown. (Tom Perrotta, New York Law Journal, Jul. 15).

The medmal crisis isn’t just affecting doctors, it’s having an impact on nurses, too:

Kimberly Ridpath was shocked to learn earlier this year that the malpractice insurance policy for her 150 health care workers had been canceled.

“I cried. I couldn’t eat. I couldn’t sleep,” said Ridpath, a registered nurse.

(Could this be the woman Senator Edwards was talking about?) She eventually found a policy, at roughly ten times the price of her original. It’s the nursing home work that makes her company such a high risk. But the problem isn’t confined to nurses who staff nursing homes. Midwives and nurse practitioners, who often serve the underserved, are finding their malpractice insurance premiums rising, too. As result, they can no longer afford to staff public health clinics on the cheap as they once did. Tort reform. It really should be a bipartisan issue.

New Jersey: “County freeholders Tuesday paid nearly $26,000 to a Crest Haven Nursing Home employee who claimed she suffered a psychiatric disorder in 2001 after a nursing home visitor made an inappropriate remark to her.” Nursing assistant Cynthia Allen, a longtime employee whose lawyer said she had a good work record, “alleged that she was feeding another patient in late December 2000 when a nursing home visitor said ‘I bet you have some fresh stuff.’” Although the visitor later denied saying anything and no one else heard the comment, Allen said it had been made in a sexually offensive way and that she had felt intimidated when seeing the visitor on two subsequent occasions. Medical experts agreed that she had suffered psychological trauma over the incident. A freeholder who voted for the payment nonetheless termed it “bizarre” and said “This is what’s wrong with our legal system.” (W. F. Keough, “Visitor?s remark to worker at Crest Haven costs county $26,000 in compensation claim”, Press of Atlantic City, Jun. 23 (reg)).

In Ohio, doctors treating the elderly are being given an “ultimatum: Stop seeing nursing home patients or get no insurance at all. … Frank O’Neil, vice president of corporate communications for malpractice insurer ProAssurance, said the company has made it a policy to stop insuring doctors whose main business is nursing home care. The lawsuit climate in nursing homes, O’Neil said, is worse than any other area of malpractice law, ‘bar none.’” (Tracy Wheeler, “Insurers push doctors to drop older patients”, Akron Beacon Journal, Feb. 15) (via MedPundit, who also covers the Ohio malpractice crisis in posts dated Feb. 14 and Feb. 17). See also Tracy Wheeler, “State seeks solutions to rising insurance costs”, Akron Beacon Journal, Feb. 15. For more on nursing home litigation, see Dec. 17 and links from there.