Federal Government Drops Appeal, Agrees to Pay $42M in Pa. Birth Injury Case
In withdrawing its appeal of an approximately $41.6 million bench verdict against it, the U.S. government has agreed to pay the parents of a child who was injured at birth due to a doctor's botched use of forceps.
February 01, 2018 at 03:03 PM
3 minute read
In withdrawing its appeal of an approximately $41.6 million bench verdict against it, the U.S. government has agreed to pay the parents of a child who was injured at birth due to a doctor's botched use of forceps.
In her findings of fact and conclusions of law issued April 20, 2017, U.S. District Judge Sylvia H. Rambo of the Middle District of Pennsylvania ordered the government to compensate Christina Late and Nathan Armolt, parents of D.A., for the brain damage their child suffered as a result of a cracked skull and destruction of parts of his brain during delivery.
In a statement released Thursday afternoon by Kline & Specter, the firm representing D.A.'s parents, attorney Regan Safier said, “The government recognized that their issues on appeal were without merit and that the verdict was just and appropriate. The judge recognized the catastrophic injuries suffered by this child and awarded the money necessary to care for him over his lifetime.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney George Michael Thiel of the Middle District of Pennsylvania declined to comment.
As to fault, Rambo laid blame on obstetrician Dr. Thomas Orndorf, who worked at the federally funded Keystone Women's Care.
“Dr. Orndorf's negligence was a direct and substantial factor in causing D.A.'s injuries,” Rambo said. “D.A. suffered harm and resultant damages from the injuries inflicted upon him by Dr. Orndorf.”
The damages broke down into $32.9 million in future care costs—which include surgeries, therapy and placement in full-time care facilities—$5 million for non-economic damages and $2.7 million in future economic damages due to lost earnings. The court based the lost wages estimate on D.A. attaining an associate's degree and subsequent employment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'These Things Tend to Go in Cycles': Avg. Partner Comp Hits $1M in Phila.
4 minute readPersonal Injury Trial Against Heavy Equipment Company Divided in Liability, Damages Portions
4 minute readPa. High Court Throws Out Disciplinary Charges Over Lawyer's $1M Fee Request
4 minute readBig Law for Harris, Solos for Trump: Here's How Pa. Attorneys Are Donating to the Presidential Election
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250