Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 48 similar cases
KRISTINA CARTER ON BEHALF OF AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF, HAWKE CARTER, A MINOR vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 00-002429N (2000)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Dade City, Florida Jun. 12, 2000 Number: 00-002429N Latest Update: Jun. 08, 2001

The Issue At issue in this proceeding is whether Hawke Carter, a minor, suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan.

Findings Of Fact As observed in the preliminary statement, neither Petitioner nor anyone on her behalf appeared at hearing, and no proof was offered to support her claim. Contrasted with the dearth of proof offered by Petitioner, Respondent offered the opinions of Michael S. Duchowny, M.D., a physician board-certified in pediatric neurology, and Charles Kalstone, M.D., a physician board- certified in obstetrics and gynecology. It was Dr. Duchowny's opinion, based on his neurological evaluation of Hawke on July 26, 2000 (at 2 1/2 years of age) and his review of the medical records regarding Hawke's birth, as well as the opinion of Dr. Kalstone, based on his review of the medical records, that Hawke's current neurological condition (which reveals evidence of severe motor and cognitive deficits) did not result from oxygen deprivation, mechanical trauma or any other event occurring during the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post-delivery period. Rather, it was their opinion that Hawke's disabilities are developmentally based and associated with a congenital syndrome, genetic in origin. Given Hawke's immediate perinatal history, which evidences an uncomplicated labor, delivery, and immediate post-partum period, as well as evidence of congenital heart disease, a diagnose of DiGeorge syndrome (confirmed by positive FISH analysis) and dysmorphic (malformed) features, the opinions of Doctors Duchowny and Kalstone are rationally based and supported by the record. Consequently, their opinions are credited, and it must be resolved that Hawkes' disability is associated with genetic or congenital abnormality, and is not related to any event which may have occurred during the course of his birth.

Florida Laws (10) 120.68766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313
# 1
ROSINA DIXON, ON BEHALF OF AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF JHALEIL DIXON, A MINOR vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION, 07-003421N (2007)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Jacksonville, Florida Jul. 24, 2007 Number: 07-003421N Latest Update: Dec. 15, 2008

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.

Florida Laws (11) 120.687.19766.301766.302766.303766.304766.305766.309766.31766.311766.313
# 6

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer