The Issue At issue in this proceeding is whether Wilgen Wandique, Jr., a minor, suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.
Findings Of Fact Wilgen Wandique and Concepcion Wandique, are the parents and natural guardians of Wilgen Wandique, Jr. (Wilgen), a minor. He was born a live infant on August 21, 1996, at Hialeah Hospital, a hospital located in Dade County, Florida, and his birth weight was in excess of 2500 grams. The physician providing obstetrical services during the birth of Wilgen was Gustavo Ruiz, M.D., who was at all times material hereto, a "participating physician" in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (the Plan), as defined by Section 766.302(7), Florida Statutes. Wilgen's delivery at Hialeah Hospital on August 21, 1996, was apparently difficult due to his large birth weight, and was complicated by a shoulder dystocia. Following delivery, Wilgen was noted having evidence of a mild to moderate compromise of the upper right brachial plexus, an Erb's palsy, which affected the range of motion on the upper right extremity, including the arm, forearm, and hand. Otherwise, Wilgen's presentation was unremarkable, and he evidenced no abnormalities with regard to his mental status and, as hereafter noted, no motor abnormalities of central nervous system origin. A brachial plexus injury, such as that suffered by Wilgen during the course of his birth, is not, anatomically, a brain or spinal cord injury, and does not affect his mental abilities. Moreover, as heretofore noted, apart from the brachial plexus injury, Wilgen was not shown to suffer any other injury during the course of his birth. Consequently, the proof fails to demonstrate that Wilgen suffered an injury to the brain or spinal cord caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury during the course of labor or delivery, and further fails to demonstrate he is presently permanently and substantially, mentally and physically impaired.
The Issue At issue in this proceeding is whether Michael Aaron Saul, a minor, suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.
Findings Of Fact Fundamental findings Lisa L. Saul and Craig Saul are the parents and natural guardians of Michael Aaron Saul (Michael), a minor. Michael was born a live infant on May 5, 1997, at Leesburg Regional Medical Center, hospital located in Leesburg, Florida and his birth weight was in excess of 2500 grams. The physician providing obstetrical services during the birth of Michael was Shivakumar S. Hanubal, M.D., who was, at all times material hereto, a participating physician in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (the Plan), as defined by Section 766.302(7), Florida Statutes. Also present at some point during the course of Michael's birth was Manuel Alvarado, M.D., who was also, at the time, a participating physician in the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (the Plan), as defined by Section 766.302(7), Florida Statutes. Coverage under the Plan Pertinent to this case, coverage is afforded under the Plan when the claimant demonstrates, more likely than not, that the infant suffered 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 post-delivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." Sections 766.302(2) and 766.309(1)(a), Florida Statutes. Here, Michael's neurologic presentation is dispositive of the claim. Michael's neurologic status On January 6, 2000, following the filing of the claim for compensation, Michael was examined by Michael Duchowny, M.D., a board-certified pediatric neurologist. The results of Dr. Duchowny's examination were reported as follows: HISTORY ACCORDING TO MRS. SAUL: Michael's mother began by explaining that Michael is a 2 1/2 year old boy who has a left Erb's palsy [damage to the upper brachial plexus]. She attributes his weakness to complications of a large birth weight and shoulder dystocia. He was delivered at Leesburg Regional Medical Center after a 9 1/2 hour labor. His birth weight was 10-pounds, 7- ounces and he remained in the nursery for 6 days for an evaluation of the upper extremity weakness. Michael has gone on to have significant problems with the left Erb's palsy. He ultimately had serial nerve graphs performed at ages 3 months and 21 months. Michael also has had a muscle transplant. The first procedure was felt to be successful, but there was no benefit from the second. He continues to be disabled, in that he postures his arm and hands. He can not fully supinate the left hand. Michael had cognitive testing at age 1 1/2 years at Shan's Hospital. This apparently revealed "mild cognitive delays". Michael has a history of breath-holding spells and has been worked up with a CT scan which apparently was normal. He is scheduled to have an EEG and cardiogram. Michael receives speech, physical and occupational therapy on a weekly basis. Michael's health is otherwise intact. He is an active boy who is on no medications and is not being followed for other chronic intercurrent illnesses. Michael walked at the usual time. He apparently is quite verbal with a good lexicon and an ability to speak in full sentences. He is not yet toilet trained. Michael is fully immunized and has no known allergies. FAMILY HISTORY: The father is 30; the mother is a 31 year old, gravida 10, para 3, AB7. Two brothers ages 8 and 4 are both healthy. There are no other family members with brachial plexus problems. There is a history of epilepsy in the mother as a child. No family members have neurodegenerative illnesses, mental retardation or cerebral palsy. PHYSICAL EXAMINATION reveals an alert, cooperative and socially appropriate 3 1/2 year old boy. The skin is warm and moist. There are no neurocutaneous stigmata. The hair is blonde and of normal texture. There are no cranial or facial anomalies or asymmetries. The pigmentation of the iris is symmetric. The tongue movements are full and symmetric. The uvula is midline. The neck is supple without masses, thyromegaly or adenopathy. The cardiovascular, respiratory and abdominal examinations are normal. Michael's NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION reveals him to have fluent speech and an age appropriate stream of attention. He has good central gaze fixation with conjugate following movements and the ocular fundi are normal. The pupils are 3 mm and briskly reactive to direct and consensually presented light. There is no ptosis and no evidence of myosis. No skin anhidrosis is noted. The motor examination is significant for evidence of a left Erb's palsy with internal rotation, flexion and adduction of the left shoulder with some flexion at the left elbow and wrist and slight ulnar deviation of the hands. Michael does have good individual finger dexterity in both hands, although he tends to prefer the right. He can oppose the thumb and first finger of both hands. Michael can not fully supinate the left hand and clearly has a right hand preference. He is unable to fully elevate the left shoulder and there is mild scapular winging. The deep tendon reflexes are diminished in the left upper extremities and at the biceps, brachial radialis and triceps jerks where they are literally absent in comparison to 1+ on the right. The knee jerks are 2+ and the ankle jerks are 2+ with flexor plantar responses. His station and gait are age appropriate with symmetric arm swing. He is able to hold his hands in a steady fashion and his rapid alternating movement sequences are age appropriate. Neurovascular examination reveals no cervical, cranial or ocular bruits and there are no temperature or pulse asymmetries. The sensory examination is deferred. In SUMMARY, Michael's neurologic examination reveals evidence of a left Erb's palsy with 2 serial nerve graphs. I should also mention that he has long linear scars in the posterior aspects of both legs in the sites of nerve graph donation. Otherwise his neurologic examination is unremarkable. He has no focal or lateralizing features to suggest structural brain damage. A brachial plexus injury, such as that suffered by Michael during the course of his birth, is not, anatomically, a brain or spinal cord injury, and does not affect his mental status, which Doctor Duchowny observed to be essentially normal. Moreover, no other physical impairments of neurological origin were observed. Consequently, while Michael has been shown to have suffered a permanent injury (to his left brachial plexus) during the course of birth, it is Dr. Duchowny's opinion, which is credited, that such injury is not related to the brain or spinal cord and, moreover, that he has not been rendered permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired.
Findings Of Fact Mya Brayboy was born on March 6, 2014, at Winnie Palmer Hospital, located in Orlando, Florida. Donald Willis, M.D. (Dr. Willis), was requested by NICA to review the medical records for Mya. In a medical report dated March 21, 2016, Dr. Willis described his findings in pertinent part as follows: In summary, this was a twin pregnancy with vaginal delivery of the first baby followed by Cesarean section for the second baby due to footling breech presentation and fetal bradycardia (fetal distress). Fetus B (Mya Brayboy) was depressed at birth and had a blood gas pH of 6.86, consistent with acidosis. The newborn hospital course was complicated by multi-system organ failure. EEG was abnormal and consistent with a history of HIE. However, the MRI on DOL 8 was reported as unremarkable. There was an apparent obstetrical event that resulted in loss of oxygen to the baby’s brain during labor, delivery and continuing into the immediate post delivery period. The oxygen deprivation resulted in some degree of brain injury based on the abnormal EEG. I am unable to determine the severity of any possible injury. Dr. Willis’ opinion that there was an apparent obstetrical event that resulted in loss of oxygen to the baby’s brain during labor, delivery and continuing into the immediate post-delivery period is credited. Respondent retained Laufey Sigurdardottir, M.D. (Dr. Sigurdardottir), a pediatric neurologist, to evaluate Mya. Dr. Sigurdardottir reviewed Mya’s medical records, and performed an independent medical examination on her on April 27, 2016. In a neurology evaluation based upon this examination and a medical records review, Dr. Sigurdardottir made the following findings and summarized her evaluation as follows: In summary: This is a 2-year-old, ex-36-week twin with significant intrapartum bradycardia resulting in an emergent C-section. Patient had a neonatal neurologic syndrome including hypotonia, little respiratory drive with multisystem abnormalities including a metabolic acidosis, hypotension, elevated creatinine, elevated coagulation studies, elevated LFTs, and poor urine input. The patient’s Apgar scores were 2 after 1 minute, 2 after 5 minutes and 3 after 10 minutes and the patient required a 9-day NICU stay. Fortunately, her EEG was reassuring and her MRI did not show definite signs of acute ischemic injury. Her neurologic exam during this examination is normal, indicating good motor function for her age. A full language evaluation could not be performed, but as per report from mother, she is on target for normal language development. No autistic features were noted. Therefore, my results within reasonable degree of medical certainty are the following: Results as to Question 1: The patient is found to have no permanent mental or physical impairment. Results as to Question 2: There is evidence of complications during Mya’s birth that resulted in hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, although her recovery has been favorable. Based on record review the timing of her hypoxic event is intrapartum. Results as to Question 3: We would expect full life expectancy and an excellent prognosis for both motor and mental skills. In light of the above-mentioned details, I do not recommend Mya to be included into the Neurologic Injury Compensation Association (NICA) and would be happy to answer additional questions. In order for a birth-related injury to be compensable under the NICA Plan, the injury must meet the definition of a birth-related neurological injury and the injury must have caused both permanent and substantial mental and physical impairment. Dr. Sigurdardottir’s opinion that Mya does not have a permanent physical or mental impairment is credited. 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. Sigurdardottir that Mya does not have a permanent physical or mental impairment.
Findings Of Fact Jamal White was born on August 19, 2010, at St. Joseph Women and Children's Hospital in Tampa, Florida. Jamal weighed 3,530 grams at birth. Donald Willis, M.D. (Dr. Willis), was requested by NICA to review the medical records for Jamal and his mother. In an affidavit dated February 22, 2013, Dr. Willis opined the following within a reasonable degree of medical probability: In summary, delivery was complicated by a shoulder dystocia. Cord blood pH was within normal limits with pH of 7.08. The baby suffered a brachial plexus injury. Hospital course was otherwise normal. Labor was complicated by a shoulder dystocia that resulted in a difficult delivery and a brachial plexus injury. However, the shoulder dystocia did not result in brain injury. There is no obstetrical event that resulted in oxygen deprivation or mechanical trauma to the brain or spinal cord during labor, delivery, or the immediate postdelivery period. Jamal was examined and evaluated by Raymond J. Fernandez, M.D. (Dr. Fernandez), on May 30, 2012. In an affidavit dated February 25, 2013, Dr. Fernandez found the following on his examination of Jamal: Jamal has mild weakness of his left arm, but in spite of this, he has good use of the arm, proximally and distally. The left arm weakness was due to a mechanical injury of his left brachial plexus during delivery that was complicated by shoulder dystocia. There was no evidence for substantial and permanent mental and physical impairment due to brain or spinal cord injury due to lack of oxygen or mechanical trauma. A review of the file does not show any contrary opinion, and Petitioner has no objection to the issuance of a summary final order finding that the injury is not compensable under Plan. The opinion of Dr. Willis that Jamal did not suffer a neurological injury due to oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury during labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate postdelivery period is credited. The opinion of Dr. Fernandez that Jamal does not have a substantial and permanent mental and physical impairment due to lack of oxygen or mechanical trauma is credited.
The Issue At issue in the proceeding is whether Demetrios Robertson, a minor, suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.
Findings Of Fact Fundamental findings Petitioner, Carmina Gilliam, is the mother and natural guardian of Demetrios Robertson, a minor. Demetrios was born a live infant on August 4, 1996, at University Medical Center, a hospital located in Jacksonville, Florida, and his birth weight exceeded 2,500 grams. The physician providing obstetrical services during the birth of Demetrios was Michael T. Valley, 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 when the claimant demonstrates, more likely than not, that the infant suffered an "injury to the brain . . . caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period in a hospital which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." Section 766.302(2), Florida Statutes. Here, the proof failed to demonstrate that Demetrios suffered a permanent and substantial mental and physical impairment. Consequently, it is unnecessary to address whether he suffered an injury to the brain caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury and, if so, whether such injury occurred in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period. Demetrios' current mental and physical presentation To address the character of Demetrios' neurologic presentation, Petitioner offered selected medical records relating to Demetrios' birth and subsequent development, as well as the opinions of Demetrios' treating pediatric neurologist, Daniel E. Shanks, M.D. In turn, Respondent offered the opinions of Michael Duchowny, M.D., a pediatric neurologist who examined Demetrios on January 17, 2001. As noted, on January 17, 2001, following the filing of the claim for compensation, Demetrios was examined by Dr. Duchowny. Pertinent to this case, the results of that evaluation were reported as follows: PHYSICAL EXAMINATION reveals Dem[e]trios to be alert, pleasant and cooperative. His weight is 55 pounds and height 32 inches. There is a single cafe-au-lait spot over the left midabdominal region. There are no dysmorphic features and no other cutaneous stigmata. The spine is straight without dysraphism. The head circumference measures 50.4 cm and there are no craniofacial anomalies or asymmetries. The fontanelles are closed. The neck is supple, without masses, thyromegaly or adenopathy and the cardiovascular, respiratory and abdominal examinations are unremarkable. Peripheral pulses are 2+ and symmetric. NEUROLOGICAL EXAMINATION: Dem[e]trios' neurological examination reveals him to be quiet but cooperative. He does have a short attention span but he is easily engaged and tends to complete requests without flinching. His speech output is noticeably diminished and he tends to speak in short phrases with poorly articulated words. He does not know primary or secondary colors and has a limited command of knowing the names of animals. He does identify body parts well. There is no evidence of overactivity. Cranial nerve examination reveals full visual fields to direct confrontation testing and normal ocular fundi. The pupils are 4 mm, react briskly to direct and consensually presented light. The optic disc margins are well- marginated with normal coloring. The tongue and palate move well and there is no drooling. Medical examination reveals mild spasticity of the lower extremities with some tightening of the heel cords. Dem[e]trios barely dorsiflexes the feet past neutrality and he has slight Babinski attitudes of the big toes. In contrast, the tone in the upper extremities is relatively normal. He has trouble with rapid alternating movement sequences and demonstrates mild decomposition. There is no focal weakness or atrophy. Dem[e]trios walks in a single fashion although there is eversion of his feet. The deep tendon reflexes are brisk and 2+ at the knees, brachioradialis and biceps. There are one or two beats or reduplication at the ankles and quite positive Babinski signs. There is no abductor spasticity. His gait is stable but he tends to posture both arms. He has difficulty walking on tip toes or heels. Romberg sign is absent. The neurovascular examination reveals no cervical, cranial, ocular bruits and no temperature or pulse asymmetries. Sensory examination was deferred. IN SUMMARY, Dem[e]trios' neurologic examination reveals evidence of moderate developmental delay, particularly in the area of language functioning. He additionally has evidence of mild lower extremity spasticity indicating a mild spastic diparesis. At a deposition held August 28, 2001, and received in evidence as Respondent's Exhibit 1, Dr. Duchowny expanded on the results of his examination and conclusions regarding the character of Demetrios' presentation, as follows: BY MR. CULPEPPER: * * * Q. . . . What were your conclusions regarding Demetrios' neurological condition? A. Having performed the evaluation and reviewing the medical records, I felt that Demetrios has neither a substantial mental nor motor impairment. Q. . . . Is Demetrios impaired? A. I believe that he does have evidence of impairment, yes. * * * Q. . . . Does Demetrios have a permanent injury? A. Yes, I believe he does. Q. Is he mentally impaired? A. I think he has developmental delay. I am using the term to distinguish it from brain damage. I think his language is behind age level, but will probably progress and continue to improve. Q. I will focus on the context of NICA. How would you quantify the seriousness of Demetrios' mental impairment? A. I would call it mild to moderate. Q. Okay. So you would not consider Demetrios' mental impairment, quote, unquote, "significant" in terms of NICA? A. That's correct. Q. Why not? A. Because he probably functions within a high -- in the high end of kids with disabilities. He basically would be mild to moderately impaired by school standards, and he is not mentally retarded. Q. To follow up, describe what you would consider a, quote, unquote, "significant" mental impairment in terms of the NICA statute? A. Well, he would have to be -- function within the mentally retarded range, and I regard him more as having evidence of language delay. Otherwise, he seems socially intact and he does well. Q. Now I'll turn to Demetrios' physical condition. Is Demetrios suffering from a physical impairment? A. Yes. Q. In the context of NICA, how would you quantify the seriousness of Demetrios' physical impairment? A. I believe he has a mild physical impairment of his legs. Q. Again, in the context of the NICA statute, would you consider Demetrios' physical impairment, quote, unquote, "significant" MR. SCHACK: Let me object to the language and the form of the question. You keep using the word "significant," and I think the language is "substantial." MR. CULPEPPER: I apologize, and thank you for pointing that out. Let me switch the words then. Q. (By Mr. Culpepper) Do you consider his impairment substantial in terms of NICA? A. No. Q. And why not? A. Because in the spectrum of what we see of motor impairment, this is simply not a substantial motor impairment. He would have to be more spastic, more involved with greater compromise of his functionality. Q. And then to clean up my error, going back to mental impairment, would you consider Demetrios' mental impairment "substantial," quote, unquote, in terms of the NICA statute? A. No, I would not. BY MR. SCHACK: * * * * * * Q. . . . When you use the terms mild, moderate, and severe, is that medical terminology? A. Well, it's not a medical dictionary word, but I think it is a modifier that tries to categorize a patient within the scope of disability that we see. Q. Well, Doctor, if this was your patient, would you just describe the neurological findings and the problems the child had rather than trying to modify it by an adjective? A. No. We always modify with an adjective. Q. Okay. A. Apart from NICA, we do that. * * * Q. It appears in this case to me, correct me if I am wrong, that regardless of whether you describe it as mild, moderate, or severe, that Demetrios has some motor difficulties that might impact on his ability to live a normal life. A. You mean lifespan or just life functions? Q. That was a -- life function. A. They might, yes. Q. Okay. He at the present time has lower motor problems, lower extremity motor problems; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. And exactly what is his problem? A. He has spasticity, mild, of his legs. Q. What does that prevent him from doing? A. Being agile, running fast, being a competitive athlete. Q. Okay. Does it give him difficulty walking? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And he can't stand straight? A. Right. Q. All right. Would you say that is a substantial problem for a child such as Demetrios? A. I think he's going to get better with time. I think he's going to be able to do most of the things he wants to do. Q. But at the present time he's unable to do things he wants to do; is that correct? A. I'm sure that's true . . . . Demetrios was last examined by his pediatric neurologist, Dr. Shanks, on October 18, 2001. Dr. Shanks reported the results of that evaluation, as follows: . . . [Demetrios] has always had a tendency to walk up on his toes since he began walking at approximately 14 months of age. It has not progressed over time. He may be a little tighter in the right than the left and he did go through physical therapy during earlier years. * * * On physical examination, height 105 cm (10th to 25th %); weight 22 kg (75th to 90th %); head circumference 51 cm (50th %). Generally, he is a well-appearing, alert youngster who is generally cooperative. There are no cranial or carotid bruits noted. Neck is supple with full range of motion. He has full primary dentition. There are no chest deformities other than a well-healed scar on his left infrascapular region inside. Abdomen is mildly obese. Extremities have full range of motion with the exception of ankles that have slight restriction in dorsiflexion, right slightly more so than the left, and there is a little bit of tightness in hip adductors. There are no asymmetries of his extremities. Back is without midline lesions. He has two hyperpigmented macular lesions, one of his abdomen and one on his back. NEUROLOGIC EXAM: Speech is fluent but mostly just one to two-word utterances. He does follow simple commands readily. Cranial nerves pupils equal, round and reactive to light; discs are sharp with normal appearing vessels. Extraocular movements are full and conjugate. Facial muscle movements full and asymmetric. Hearing is normal to low-level stimulation bilaterally. Palate elevates symmetrically; sternomastoids are strong and tongue is midline. Motor exam shows normal tone with the exception of his distal lower extremities and a possible slight spastic catch in his hip adductors. Upper extremity tone feels relatively normal. Deep tendon reflexes are 2+ in the upper extremities, 3- 4+ lower extremities with crossed adductors. Ankle jerks are 1+ and toes are upgoing bilaterally, more strongly on the right than the left. With gait, he does have a tendency to get up on his toes slightly but is very functionally mobile. Sensory exam is intact to touch, cold and vibration. He has no cerebellar signs or adventitial movements. IMPRESSION: Likely mild spastic diplegia with overall relatively good prognosis for functional capabilities. He also seems to have significant cognitive delays . . . . Considering the proof, it must be resolved that Petitioner has failed to demonstrate, more likely than not, that Demetrios is permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired.1 Notably, Doctors Duchowny and Shanks share strikingly similar views regarding the characterization of Demetrios' physical presentation, and concur that his physical impairment can best be described as mild. With regard to Demetrios' mental impairment, Dr. Duchowny was of the view that Demetrios was developmentally delayed, but would likely improve, and that his impairment could best be described as mild to moderate. In contrast, Dr. Shank's was of the view that Demetrios "seems to have significant cognative delays"; but did not otherwise characterize Demetrios' impairment. Stated otherwise, Dr. Shank's did not express an opinion as to whether Demetrios' mental impairment could best be described as mild, moderate, or severe, and expressed no opinion as to whether Demetrios' impairment was or was not likely to improve.
The Issue At issue in this proceeding is whether Morgan Wilson, a minor, qualifies for coverage under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.
Findings Of Fact Preliminary findings Petitioners, Tracie Wilson and James Ray Wilson, are the natural parents and guardians of Morgan Wilson. Morgan was born a live infant on December 12, 2000, at Baptist Medical Center, a hospital located in Jacksonville, Florida, and her birth weight exceeded 2,500 grams. The physician providing obstetrical services at Morgan's birth was Martin Garcia, 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. Morgan's birth At or about 7:29 a.m., December 12, 2000, Mrs. Wilson (with an estimated date of delivery of December 23, 2000, and the fetus at 38 3/7 weeks gestation) presented to Baptist Medical Center, in labor. At the time, Mrs. Wilson's membranes were noted as intact, and mild to moderate uterine contractions were noted at a frequency of 2-4 minutes. Fetal monitoring revealed a reassuring fetal heart rate, with a baseline of 150-160 beats per minute, and the presence of fetal movement. At 9:45 a.m., Mrs. Wilson's membranes were artificially ruptured, with meconium stained amniotic fluid noted. At the time, vaginal examination revealed the cervix at 4 centimeters, effacement complete, and the fetus at 0 station. Mrs. Wilson's labor progressed, and at 7:29 p.m., Morgan was delivered, with vacuum assistance. According to the Admission Summary, Morgan was suctioned on the perineum, and, before she could be moved to the warmer, the "[c]ord clamp loosened with small amount of blood loss prior to reclamping." The Admission Summary further reveals that Morgan was "floppy and required bag mask ventilation x3 minutes, then blowby oxygen for 3 minutes." Apgar scores were noted as 1 and 8, at one and five minutes,2 and umbilical cord pH was reported as normal (7.28). Morgan was transferred to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for "eval[uation] after blood loss." There, her blood count (with a hematocrit of 46 percent) was reported as normal or, stated otherwise, without evidence of a clinically significant blood loss due to the loosening of the clamp. Following two hours of observation, Morgan was transferred to the normal newborn nursery; however, at 4:20 p.m., December 13, 2000, she was readmitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. The reason for admission was stated in the Admission Summary, as follows: . . . Indications for transfer included 38 week WF with renal vein thrombosis and left middle cerebral artery stroke. Neonatology consulted midafternoon today secondary to hematuria. On exam, Dr. Cuevas noted asymmetry of pupils, with right more dilated and less responsive then left. Also noted to have torticollis, preferring to keep head turned to left. Also noted to have palpable mass in left abdomen. Renal ultrasound revealed renal vein thrombosis. HUS showed some echogenecity so Head CT done revealing left middle cerebral artery stroke. Hct this am 41. Baby then admitted to NICU for further care. Neurology and hematology consulted as well as nephrology. Impressions on admission included: possible coaguloathy; left middle cerebral artery stroke; renal vein thrombosis; and torticollis. Morgan remained at Baptist Medical Center until December 29, 2000, when she was discharged to her parents' care. Morgan's Discharge Summary noted the following active diagnoses: possible coagulopathy; anemia; left middle cerebral artery stroke; renal vein thrombosis; and torticollis. 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 . . . caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period in a hospital, which renders the infant permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." Sections 766.302(2) and 766.309(1)(a), Florida Statutes. Here, indisputably, the record demonstrates that Morgan suffered an injury to the brain (following a stroke in the territory of the left middle cerebral artery, likely due to arterial occlusion or superior saggital sinus thrombosis). What is disputed, is whether the proof demonstrates, more likely than not, that such injury occurred "in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation," and whether any such injury rendered Morgan "permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." The timing of, and the neurologic consequences that followed, Morgan's brain injury To address whether Morgan's brain injury occurred "in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation," and whether such injury rendered Morgan "permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired," Petitioners offered medical records relating to Mrs. Wilson's antepartum course, as well as those associated with Morgan's birth and subsequent development. Additionally, Mrs. Wilson testified on her own behalf, and Respondent offered the deposition testimony of Dr. Donald Willis, a physician board-certified in obstetrics and gynecology, as well as maternal-fetal medicine, and Dr. Michael Duchowny, a physician board-certified in pediatrics, neurology with special competence in child neurology, electroencephalography, and neurophysiology.3 As for the timing of Morgan's injury, it was Dr. Willis' opinion that the medical records did not reveal any obstetrical event that would account for Morgan's injury. In so concluding, Dr. Willis noted that fetal monitoring (which began on admission and continued until 7:28 p.m., one minute prior to delivery) did not reveal evidence of fetal compromise or a clinically significant event that would account for Morgan's injury, that Morgan's 5-minute Apgar score was normal, her umbilical cord pH was normal, and her hematocrit on initial admission to the neonatal intensive care unit was normal. Consequently, Dr. Willis concluded that Morgan's injury did not occur during labor, delivery, or resuscitation. Also speaking to the timing of Morgan's injury was Dr. Duchowny who, based on his review of the medical records, shared Dr. Willis' opinion that there was no evident problem during labor and delivery, and further opined that Morgan's injury likely occurred prior to labor. In concluding that Morgan's injury likely predated the onset of labor, Dr. Duchowny noted that Morgan's CT scan on the day after birth clearly revealed a stroke in the territory of the left middle cerebral artery, and that it would take at least 72 hours for a stroke to be revealed so clearly on a CT scan. Apart from the timing of Morgan's brain injury, Dr. Duchowny also expressed his opinions, based on his examination of November 6, 2001, regarding the neurologic consequences that followed Morgan's injury. Dr. Duchowny reported the results of Morgan's neurology evaluation, as follows: PHYSICAL EXAMINATION reveals an alert, well developed and well nourished 10 1/2 month old white female. The skin is warm and moist. There are no cutaneous stigmata or dysmorphic features. The hair is light blonde, fine and of normal texture. Morgan weighs 18-pounds, 10-ounces. Her head circumference measures 45.6 cm, which is at the 60th percentile for age matched controls. There are no dysraphic features. The neck is supple without masses, thyromegaly or adenopathy. The cardiovascular, respiratory and abdominal examinations are normal. NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION reveals an alert infant who is socially oriented. She has good central gaze fixation, conjugate following and normal ocular fundi. The pupils are 3 mm and react briskly to direct and consensually presented light. There is blink to threat from both directions. There are no facial asymmetries. The tongue and palate move well, and there is no drooling. Motor examination reveals an obvious asymmetry of posturing and movement. The left side is positioned normally and tends to grasp for objects. The right upper and lower extremity have diminished movement in comparison to the left and there is a tendency for the left hand to cross the midline for all manual tasks. She will not grasp for an offered cube with her right hand. In contrast, the left hand will grasp for a cube and display the beginnings of individual finger movements. The thumb on the right hand is fisted. The muscle, bulk and tone appears symmetric. Deep tendon reflexes are 2+ at the biceps and knees. Both plantare responses are mildly extensor. On pull-to-sit there is an asymmetry of the upper extremity, with relatively greater pull on the left side. The neck tone is good. There are no adventitious movements. Sensory examination is intact to withdrawal of all extremities to touch. The neurovascular examination via the anterior fontanelle is unremarkable. In SUMMARY, Morgan's neurologic examination reveals a mild to moderate motor asymmetry of the right side affecting primarily upper extremity, but with some lower extremity involvement as well. In contrast, Morgan's cognitive status appeared well preserved for age and she is certainly developing on schedule with regard to her linguistic milestones. I suspect that Morgan's motor function will continue to improve, as she is working actively in therapy. In sum, it was Dr. Duchowny's opinion that Morgan evidenced neither a permanent and substantial physical impairment nor a permanent and substantial mental impairment. In contrast to the proof offered by Respondent, Petitioners offered the lay testimony of Mrs. Wilson, which was legally insufficient to support a finding regarding the timing of Morgan's brain injury, and which failed to support a conclusion that Morgan was permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired. See, e.g., 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.") Consequently, since the opinions of Dr. Willis and Dr. Duchowny are logical, and consistent with the medical records, it must be resolved that, more likely than not, Morgan's brain injury did not occur "in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation," and that Morgan's injury did not render her "permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired." 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.")
Findings Of Fact Asher was born on April 20, 2017, at Memorial Hospital located in Pembroke Pines, Florida. Upon receiving the Petition, NICA retained Michael S. Duchowny, M.D., a pediatric neurologist, to review Asher’s case. NICA sought to obtain an opinion whether there was an injury to Asher’s brain or spinal cord at birth caused by oxygen deprivation or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period, and whether that injury rendered Asher permanently and substantially mentally and physically impaired. Dr. Duchowny reviewed Asher’s medical records, as well as examined Asher on October 10, 2018. Dr. Duchowny opined, within a reasonable degree of medical probability: [I]t is my opinion that ASHER’s neurological examination reveals neurological findings consistent with a mild motor impairment primarily affecting his right upper extremity. In contrast, Asher has preserved cognitive function and social awareness. He evidences slightly decreased muscle tone in the right distal upper and lower extremities and slightly increased deep tendon reflexes. As such, it is my opinion that despite ASHER’s abnormal MR imaging studies at birth which document prominent hemorrhagic infarction in territories supplied by the left middle and posterior cerebral arteries with a smaller region of right middle cerebral artery infarction, and bilateral parieto-occipital areas of increased signal, he has recovered to a point where he no longer evidences either substantive mental or physical impairment. Based upon my evaluation and record review, as ASHER is developing normally, I am not recommending him for acceptance into the NICA program. A review of the records filed in this matter reveals no contrary evidence to dispute the findings and opinion of Dr. Duchowny. His opinion is credible and persuasive. Based on the opinion and conclusion of Dr. Duchowny, NICA determined that Petitioners’ claim was not compensable. NICA subsequently filed the Motion for Partial Summary Final Order asserting that Asher has not suffered a “birth-related neurological injury” as defined by section 766.302(2). Petitioners do not oppose NICA’s motion.
