Trip, Fall Over Alleged Stool an Open, Obvious Condition: Defense
On Feb. 5, 2015, plaintiff Barbara Bouton, 82, tripped and fell in a patient-examination room at Jefferson Family Associates, in Philadelphia. She asserted that she tripped and fell on the room's step stool. She claimed injuries to her neck, shoulder and knee.
May 16, 2019 at 11:33 AM
4 minute read
|
Bouton v. Jefferson Family Association
Defense Verdict
Date of Verdict: March 29.
Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 160802015.
Judge: Stella M. Tsai.
Type of Action: Trip and fall, premises liability.
Injuries: Neck, knee, shoulder injuries.
Plaintiffs Counsel: Jeffrey P. Curry, Rosenbaum & Associates, Philadelphia.
Plaintiffs Expert: Lance O. Yarus, orthopedic surgery, Philadelphia.
Defense Counsel: Joseph W. Petka, Goldberg Miller & Rubin, Philadelphia.
Comment:
On Feb. 5, 2015, plaintiff Barbara Bouton, 82, tripped and fell in a patient-examination room at Jefferson Family Associates, in Philadelphia. She asserted that she tripped and fell on the room's step stool. She claimed injuries to her neck, shoulder and knee.
Bouton sued Jefferson Family Associates and its owner, Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals Inc. Bouton alleged that the defendants were negligent for allowing a dangerous condition to exist. Bouton's counsel argued that the medical facility created a hazardous condition by leaving the step stool in the walking path of the exam room. The step stool should have been kept under the exam table or in a different area to prevent it from becoming a tripping hazard, Bouton's counsel contended. Bouton alleged that a medical assistant had witnessed her trip and fall.
The defense maintained that the doctor's office did nothing wrong, and that the fall was the result of the Bouton's not paying attention to where she was walking. Even if the step stool was out of place, it was still not a dangerous defect, as it was open and obvious, the defense asserted.
The medical assistant denied that she witnessed Bouton's trip and fall.
Upon falling, Bouton was examined by the facility's medical staff with complaints of pain to her neck, her left knee and the right shoulder, part of her dominant arm. Later that evening, Bouton presented to an emergency room with continuing complaints, in addition to numbness in her right hand, and she was examined and released. On Feb. 10, Bouton presented to a rehabilitation facility where she treated through July 30. During that time, she consulted with an orthopedic surgeon, who, via MRIs, diagnosed her with herniations at cervical intervertebral discs C2-3, C3-4, C4-5; a tear of the right glenoid labrum; internal derangement of the right shoulder, and right-sided radiculopathy stemming from C6. Bouton was recommended for surgical repair of her right shoulder, which she declined. No further treatment was rendered, and Bouton sought to recover $9,445 in medical costs.
Bouton's orthopedic surgeon causally related her injuries and treatment to the accident. The physician, who noted that Bouton has a 40% loss of range of motion in her shoulder, testified that Bouton requires future surgeries to her neck and shoulder, estimated at approximately $200,000.
Bouton testified that her impaired shoulder affects every aspect of her daily living, as she is unable to use her arm for anything above shoulder height. She allegedly can no longer use her right hand, due to ongoing numbness caused by the radiculopathy, for any fine motor activities, including buttoning buttons and combing her hair. She stated that she requires assistance with most activities of daily living, including going to the bathroom, with which her husband assists her. Bouton sought damages for past and future pain and suffering. Her husband, plaintiff Ollie Gill, sought damages for his claim for loss of consortium.
The defense questioned Bouton's need for shoulder surgery, as she had not undergone the procedure since the accident. The defense noted that in 2005, after she had tripped and fallen, Bouton had complaints of neck and right-shoulder pain.
This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs and defense counsel.
—This report first appeared in VerdictSearch, an ALM publication
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 AllThe Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute readFederal Judge Allows Elderly Woman's Consumer Protection Suit to Proceed Against Citizens Bank
5 minute readJudge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
4 minute readSupreme Court's Ruling in 'Students for Fair Admissions' and Its Impact on DEI Initiatives in the Workplace
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Pusillanimous Press
- 2Contract Lifecycle Management Company ContractPodAi Unveils Leah Drive
- 3'Great News' for Businesses? Judge Halts Transparency Mandate
- 4Consilio Announces ‘Native AI Review,’ Expanding Its Gen AI E-Discovery Offerings
- 5Federal Judge Hits US With $227,000 Sanction for Discovery Misconduct
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