Jennifer R. Johnson/(case name is confidential)

Опубликовано: 06 Август 2026
на канале: ConsumerAttorneysCA
49
0

A SURGEON’S UNDISCLOSED DISABILITY RESULTS IN A PATIENT’S BLINDNESS
When one of the world’s leading vitreo-retinal surgeons botched an elective eye surgery for treatment of floaters, the plaintiff was left blind in one eye. Three doctors – the defendant surgeon, another retinal surgeon and an internationally known neuro-ophthalmologist – all told the plaintiff that he had suffered a rare, never before reported reaction to the anesthesia injected into his eye and that his blindness was not the result of negligence. Consequently, before plaintiff found Jennifer, several attorneys rejected this case. Jennifer’s gut instinct (she is a former registered nurse) was that the doctors’ explanation was wrong, and she was determined to find out what really happened. While nearly 20 expert witnesses refused to testify against the defendant, Jennifer was not deterred. She found a Stanford-trained retinal specialist who, upon review of the pertinent records, discovered that the defendant had injected the anesthesia into the wrong area of the eye. Having established that, Jennifer had to know why a world renowned expert in floater surgery would inject anesthesia into the wrong area. After the surgeon disclosed in deposition that he had undergone cancer treatment, including chemotherapy before the plaintiff’s surgery, but told the plaintiff that he was fully recovered at the time of surgery, Jennifer subpoenaed the doctor’s medical records. Those records revealed that the doctor had suffered a disabling side effect of his chemotherapy treatment, peripheral neuropathy of the hands and feet, affecting the exquisite feeling and sensitivity he needed to use the equipment required to perform the plaintiff’s surgery. Incredibly, the records also showed that the surgeon was collecting disability payments and had declared he was not working when he operated on the plaintiff. Jennifer’s grit and determination led to a settlement including the insurance policy limits and a substantial contribution from the doctor. Most importantly, this surgeon finally stopped operating, preventing him from blinding anyone else.