The Issue The issue in this case is whether Reshnaya E. Francois suffered a birth-related injury as defined by section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes, for which compensation should be awarded under the Plan.
Findings Of Fact Reshnaya E. Francois was born on January 31, 2016, at Broward Health, in Coral Springs, Florida. Reshnaya weighed in excess of 2,500 grams at birth. The circumstances of the labor, delivery, and birth of the minor child are reflected in the medical records of Broward Health submitted with the Petition. At all times material, both Broward Health and Dr. Wajid were active members under NICA pursuant to sections 766.302(6) and (7). Reshnaya was delivered by Dr. Wajid, who was a NICA- participating physician, on January 31, 2016. Petitioners contend that Reshnaya suffered a birth- related neurological injury and seek compensation under the Plan. Respondent contends that Reshnaya has not suffered a birth- related neurological injury as defined by section 766.302(2). In order for a claim to be compensable under the Plan, certain statutory requisites must be met. Section 766.309 provides: The Administrative Law Judge shall make the following determinations based upon all available evidence: Whether the injury claimed is a birth- related neurological injury. If the claimant has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Administrative Law Judge, that the infant has sustained a brain or spinal cord injury caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury and that the infant was thereby rendered permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired, a rebuttable presumption shall arise that the injury is a birth-related neurological injury as defined in § 766.302(2). Whether obstetrical services were delivered by a participating physician in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period in a hospital; or by a certified nurse midwife in a teaching hospital supervised by a participating physician in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period in a hospital. How much compensation, if any, is awardable pursuant to § 766.31. If the Administrative Law Judge determines that the injury alleged is not a birth-related neurological injury or that obstetrical services were not delivered by a participating physician at birth, she or he shall enter an order . . . . The term “birth-related neurological injury” is defined in Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes, as: . . . injury to the brain or spinal cord of a live infant weighing at least 2,500 grams for a single gestation or, in the case of a multiple gestation, a live infant weighing at least 2,000 grams at birth caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired. This definition shall apply to live births only and shall not include disability or death caused by genetic or congenital abnormality. (Emphasis added). In the instant case, NICA has retained Donald Willis, M.D. (Dr. Willis), as its medical expert specializing in maternal-fetal medicine and pediatric neurology. Upon examination of the pertinent medical records, Dr. Willis opined: The newborn was not depressed. Apgar scores were 8/8. Decreased movement of the right arm was noted. The baby was taken to the Mother Baby Unit and admission exam described the baby as alert and active. The baby had an Erb’s palsy or Brachial Plexus injury of the right arm. Clinical appearance of the baby suggested Down syndrome. Chromosome analysis was done for clinical features suggestive of Down syndrome and this genetic abnormality was confirmed. Chromosome analysis was consistent with 47, XX+21 (Down syndrome). Dr. Willis’s medical Report is attached to his Affidavit. His Affidavit reflects his ultimate opinion that: In summary: Delivery was complicated by a mild shoulder dystocia and resulting Erb’s palsy. There was no evidence of injury to the spinal cord. The newborn was not depressed. Apgar scores were 8/9. Chromosome analysis was consistent with Down syndrome. There was no apparent obstetrical event that resulted in loss of oxygen or mechanical trauma to the baby’s brain or spinal cord during labor, delivery or the immediate post delivery period. The baby has a genetic or chromosome abnormality, Down syndrome. A review of the file in this case reveals that there have been no expert opinions filed that are contrary to the opinion of Dr. Willis. The opinion of Dr. Willis that Reshnaya did not suffer an obstetrical event that resulted in loss of oxygen or mechanical trauma to the baby’s brain or spinal cord during labor, delivery, or the immediate post-delivery period is credited. In the instant case, NICA has retained Michael S. Duchowny, M.D. (Dr. Duchowny), as its medical expert in pediatric neurology. Upon examination of the child and the pertinent medical records, Dr. Duchowny opined: In summary, Reshnaya’s examination today reveals findings consistent with Down syndrome including multiple dysmorphic features, hypotonia, and hyporeflexia. She has minimal weakness at the right shoulder girdle and her delayed motor milestones are likely related to her underlying genetic disorder. There are no focal or lateralizing features suggesting a structural brain injury. Dr. Duchowny’s medical report is attached to his Affidavit. His Affidavit reflects his ultimate opinion that: Neither the findings on today’s evaluation nor the medical record review indicate that Reshnaya has either a substantial mental or motor impairment acquired in the course of labor or delivery. I believe that her present neurological disability is more likely related to Downs syndrome. For this reason, I am not recommending that Reshnaya be considered for compensation within the NICA program. A review of the file in this case reveals that there have been no expert opinions filed that are contrary to the opinion of Dr. Duchowny. The opinion of Dr. Duchowny that Reshnaya did not suffer a substantial mental or motor impairment acquired in the course of labor or delivery is credited.
The Issue At issue is whether Jhaleil Dixon, a minor, qualifies for coverage under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (Plan).
Findings Of Fact Stipulated facts Rosina Dixon is the natural mother and guardian of Jhaleil Dixon, a minor. Jhaleil was born a live infant on February 17, 2004, at Shands Medical Center, a hospital located in Jacksonville, Florida, and his birth weight exceeded 2,500 grams. Coverage under the Plan Pertinent to this case, coverage is afforded by the Plan for infants who suffer a "birth-related neurological injury," defined as an "injury to the brain or spinal cord . . . caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." § 766.302(2), Fla. Stat. The etiology of Jhaleil's impairments To address the likely etiology of Jhaleil's impairments, Ms. Dixon testified on her own behalf, and offered the testimony of Page Lutchman. In contrast, NICA offered the testimony of Donald Willis, M.D., a physician board-certified in obstetrics and gynecology, and maternal-fetal medicine, together with Dr. Willis' reports and the medical records related to Jhaleil's birth. Based on Dr. Willis' review of the medical records, it was his opinion that, within a reasonable degree of medical probability, Jhaleil did not suffer an injury to his brain or spinal cord caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation. In so concluding, Dr. Willis noted that Apgar scores were 3 and 7, at one and five minutes, respectively; that while depressed at birth, Jhaleil responded quickly to minimal resuscitation; umbilical cord blood gas was normal, with pH of 7.19 and base excess of -3.1; neurologic consultation was consistent with bilateral brachial plexus injury, not an injury to the brain or spinal cord; MRI of the spine on day 3 of life was negative; and, there being no evidence of multisystem system involvement (i.e., seizures, renal failure), Jhaleil's newborn stay was not otherwise consistent with injury to the brain or spinal cord. The opinions of Dr. Willis are rationally based, supported by the record, and credible. Consequently, it must be resolved that, more likely than not, Jhaleil's impairments were not the result of a brain or spinal cord injury caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation. See Vero Beach Care Center v. Ricks, 476 So. 2d 262, 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)("[L]ay testimony is legally insufficient to support a finding of causation where the medical condition involved is not readily observable."); Ackley v. General Parcel Service, 646 So. 2d 242, 245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)("The determination of the cause of a non-observable medical condition, such as a psychiatric illness, is essentially a medical question."); Thomas v. Salvation Army, 562 So. 2d 746, 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)("In evaluating medical evidence, a judge of compensation claims may not reject uncontroverted medical testimony without a reasonable explanation."). Therefore, the proof fails to support the conclusion that Jhaleil suffered a "birth-related neurological injury," as required for coverage under the Plan.
The Issue At issue is weather Tyler Anthony Carter, a minor, qualifies for coverage under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (Plan).
Findings Of Fact Stipulated facts Victoria Knight Carter and Roy Carter are the natural parents of Tyler Anthony Carter, a minor. Tyler was born a live infant on February 7, 2005, at North Shore Medical Center, a licensed hospital located in Miami, Florida, and his birth weight exceeded 2,500 grams. Obstetrical services were delivered at Tyler's birth by Ramon Hechavarria, M.D., who, at all times material hereto, was a "participating physician" in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan, as defined by Section 766.302(7), Florida Statutes. Coverage under the Plan Pertinent to this case, coverage is afforded by the Plan for infants who suffer a "birth-related neurological injury," defined as an "injury to the brain or spinal cord . . . caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." § 766.302(2), Fla. Stat. Here, the proof demonstrated that Tyler's delivery was complicated by a shoulder dystocia, which caused a brachial plexus injury, that resulted in a weakness (an Erb's palsy) in the left upper extremity. Otherwise, Tyler was not shown to suffer any injury at birth. To address the nature and significance of Tyler's injury, NICA offered the testimony of Michael Duchowny, M.D., a physician board-certified in pediatrics, neurology with special competence in child neurology, and clinical neurophysiology.1 (Respondent's Exhibit 1, deposition of Dr. Duchowny). Dr. Duchowny evaluated Tyler on October 17, 2007, and reported the results of his physical and neurological evaluation, as follows: PHYSICAL EXAMINATION reveals an alert, cooperative 2 1/2-year-old, well-developed and well-nourished toddler. Tyler[] weighs 29 pounds. His skin is warm and moist. There are no dysmorphic features or neurocutaneous stigmata. Head circumference measures 49.2 centimeters, which is within standard percentiles for age. The fontanels are closed. There are no cranial or facial anomalies or asymmetries. The neck is supple without masses, thyromegaly or adenopathy. The cardiovascular, respiratory, and abdominal examinations are unremarkable. Tyler's NEUROLOGICAL EXAMINATION reveals an alert and sociable toddler. His speech is fluent and appropriately articulated. He maintains an age appropriate stream of attention. His social skills are appropriately developed for age. Cranial nerve examination is unremarkable. The extraocular movements are fully conjugate in all planes and the pupils are 3 mm and briskly reactive to direct and consensually presented light. A brief funduscopic examination is unremarkable. There are no significant facial asymmetries. The uvula is midline and the pharyngeal folds are symmetric. The tongue is moist and papillated. Motor examination reveals an asymmetry of the upper extremities. There is slightly diminished muscle bulk in the distal left upper extremity. Tyler is unable to raise the left arm past neutrality. He tends to posture the left arm with flexion at the elbow and wrist. Tyler cannot fully supinate the left hand. He can build a tower with using either hand and has bimanual dexterity. However, he demonstrates a consistent right hand preference. There are no fixed contractures. The deep tendon reflexes are 2+ in the lower extremities and the right upper extremity but 1+ at the [left] biceps. The sensory examination is intact to withdrawal of all extremities to stimulation. The neurovascular examination reveals no cervical, cranial or ocular bruits and no temperature or pulse asymmetries. In SUMMARY, Tyler's neurological examination reveals a mild left Erb's palsy, which was likely acquired during delivery due to traction on the brachial plexus. In contrast, there are no abnormalities referable to the right upper extremity or the lower extremities. Tyler's mental functioning is appropriate for age level. (Joint Exhibit 1, Report of Dr. Duchowny, dated October 17, 2007; Respondent's Exhibit 1, pp. 15 and 16). An Erb's palsy, as evidenced by Tyler, is a weakness of an upper extremity due to damage to the nerve roots of the left brachial plexus, a peripheral nerve injury, and does not represent an injury to the brain or spinal cord (the central nervous system). (Respondent's Exhibit 1, pp. 10 and 11).2 Moreover, the physical impairment Tyler suffers is mild, as opposed to substantial, and there is no compelling evidence of mental impairment, much less substantial mental impairment. (Respondent's Exhibit 1, pp. 8-10). Ackley v. General Parcel Service, 646 So. 2d 242, 245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)("The determination of the cause of a non-observable medical condition, such as a psychiatric illness, is essentially a medical question."); Thomas v. Salvation Army, 562 So. 2d 746, 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)("In evaluating medical evidence, a judge of compensation claims may not reject uncontroverted medical testimony without a reasonable explanation."). Consequently, while Tyler may have suffered a mechanical injury, permanent in nature (to his left brachial plexus) during the course of birth, he does not qualify for coverage under the Plan.
