The Kalfus Nachman Blog

Insurance Company for Negligent Doctors Tries To Reduce Solace For Widower

A Spotsylvania, Virginia jury selected for its impartiality agreed with a victim's widower that a doctor should have ordered further tests to determine the nature of a lump on the victim's breast. The jury also determined that, had the victim been tested further, she would not have died at age 57 from breast cancer. This was a terrible loss of life, due to Virginia medical malpractice.

The Virginia medical doctor tested the lump and thought that the lump was non-cancerous in nature. Over the next seven months, the lump then grew from the size of a peach pit to the size of a lemon, and spread to her stomach, pancreas, and brain.

After five and one-half hours of deliberation, the Virginia jury awarded the victim’s widower $6.5 million for solace and the loss of his wife of 27 years. Testimony showed that the victim and the widower were not only spouses but best friends who did everything together.
Attorneys for the defense will argue in post-trial hearings that the jurors awarded too much money pursuant to a medical malpractice cap on damages promoted heavily by doctors, insurance companies, and their lobbyists. Which goes to show you that a medical malpractice cap only hurts the people who are most injured.