Riverside County Settles $2.25M Medical Malpractice Case

Case Background

A medical malpractice lawsuit filed against the County of Riverside and its medical facilities concluded with a significant out-of-Court settlement. Lovell Avery filed the complaint on July 26, 2023, in the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside, naming the County of Riverside, Riverside University Health System-Medical Center (RUHS-MC), and several physicians Arjun Bakshi, M.D., John Cortelyou Naftel, M.D., and Tristen Burt, D.O. as Defendants. Avery’s lawsuit claimed that negligent medical care had resulted in serious and lasting injuries during a period of treatment that had occurred earlier in the year.

Cause

The core of the lawsuit was a claim of Medical Malpractice. The Plaintiff’s attorneys asserted that the Defendants the hospital system, the County, and the involved doctors failed to deliver the quality of care required by professional standards. This failure included, but was not limited to, misdiagnosis, inappropriate treatment, or deficient execution of medical duties. Avery’s legal team claimed that the Defendants' negligence had directly caused injury, which a reasonably skilled medical professional operating under the same circumstances would have avoided. The Plaintiff had filed a formal claim for damages with the County of Riverside on February 10, 2023, and the County had officially denied that claim on February 16, 2023, shortly before the lawsuit began.

Injury

Lovell Avery sustained severe and detrimental injuries as a result of the alleged substandard care. The complaint described that the Plaintiff had suffered both physical and emotional harm. The most critical aspect of the injury involved physical pain and suffering and the need for extensive ongoing medical care. The injuries had not only caused current suffering but also created an expectation of future physical and emotional damage, necessitating long-term medical treatment and rehabilitation.

Damages Sought

The Plaintiff’s attorneys requested that the Court award damages far exceeding the $25,000 minimum jurisdiction for unlimited civil cases. Lovell Avery sought recovery for two primary types of losses:

Economic Damages: This category covered financial losses that could be calculated, including compensation for all medical and other special damages past, present, and future. Avery also sought damages for past and future loss of earnings and loss of earning capacity, arguing the injuries had hampered his ability to work and earn a living.

General Damages: This category covered non-economic damages, such as pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The Plaintiff sought general damages according to proof, asking the jury to award an amount that adequately compensated him for the non-monetary consequences of the medical negligence.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

The formal legal action began with the filing of the complaint, which included a demand for a jury trial. The Defendants, the County of Riverside and the associated medical parties, quickly responded by filing their answer to the complaint on October 5, 2023, formally initiating the litigation phase.

Legal Representation

Plaintiff(s): Lovell Avery.

· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Benjamin T. Ikuta, Esq. | Diana Connaughton, Esq.

· Counsel for Defendant(s): Mitzie L. Dobson, Esq.

Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel

Claims

The Plaintiff’s attorneys claimed that the Defendants had breached the standard of care required of medical professionals and healthcare systems. They asserted that this failure constituted negligence, making the Defendants legally responsible for the resulting injuries. Their claims specifically targeted the actions and omissions of the doctors and the hospital staff, maintaining that these failures directly caused Avery’s extensive injuries and financial losses. They claimed the severity of the Plaintiff's injuries underscored the unacceptable deviation from accepted medical practice.

Defense

The defense, representing the County and the Health System, mounted a blanket denial of the Plaintiff’s allegations in their answer. They asserted a range of affirmative defenses to avoid liability. Key defenses included the claim that the Defendants met the required standard of care and that any injuries or complications Avery experienced were either pre-existing, unforeseeable, or the result of factors other than the Defendants' actions. Furthermore, the defense argued that the Plaintiff's own failure to follow medical advice or contribute to his care had contributed to his damages, invoking the principle of comparative fault. They also sought protection under various governmental immunities that often shield public entities from liability.

Settlement

The complex medical malpractice case resolved through a negotiated settlement, preventing the need for a jury to determine fault and damages. The parties, having completed the discovery phase, came to a final agreement that settled all claims against the County of Riverside and its health system. The Plaintiff’s counsel confirmed that the total settlement amount reached was $2,250,000. This resolution concluded the lawsuit, offering compensation to Lovell Avery for his medical injuries and damages without a formal finding of fault by the Court.

Court documents are available upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com