The plaintiff says

Injuries claimed: Linking injury that require several procedures and correction operations

Name of the case: Wiggins v. Kownack, et al.

Court: Virginia Beach Circuit Court

Case no.: CL22-2700

Tried beforehand: jury

Name of the judge: Judge James C. Lewis

Date solved: February 6, 2025

Special damage: Approx. 150,000 US dollars of medicinal bills, approximately 45,000 US dollars of lost wages

Demand: $ 150,000

Lawyers for the accused: Rodney S. Dillman and Jennifer L. Stevens, Virginia Beach, Dillman Legal Group

Description of the case: The plaintiff was 34 years old at the time of her work and childbirth in May 2021. During the delivery, the baby had a persistent Occiput -rear monitoring despite the manual rotation in three attempts. An emergency Caesarean section was ordered. The accused Obgyn delivered the baby without injury. The accused Obgyn and another colleague helped the repair and closure. The plaintiff was released on the second day after the second day with good urine edition and without flank pain.

Four days later, the plaintiff suffered from extreme abdominal/flank pain and presented himself to the emergency room. A CT scan showed a bilateral hydronephrosis that greater than left on the left, and the fluid accumulation on the side of the ureter and the left colic channel with concern for ureteral injuries with extravasation. Urology was consulted.

The plaintiff was ultimately diagnosed with a violation of the left ureter, in which several procedures and correction operations were required. The plaintiff had to put a tube from her back into a urine tapping bag from her back in the next four months.

The plaintiff's theory of the case was that the accused Obgyn caused the ureter injury with a stitch during the repair. The plaintiff presented an expert standard for care and did not bring the retained urology expert to court.

Both retained experts from the plaintiff said that the effort of the accused Obgyn was heroic.

The defense brought two standard experts for nursing experts that everything the accused Obgyn did was appropriate. In addition, the defense brought a urologist and radiologist to say that the plaintiff's violation was not caused by a stab, but probably caused by compression.

The plaintiff claimed medical invoices of around 150,000 US dollars as compensation and approximately $ 45,000 in lost wages as compensation. She also submitted photos in which the tube emphasized from her back and scars and disfigurement that she had suffered from the correction operations. In his final argument, the plaintiff claimed 2 million US dollars.

The jury returned a defense conclusion.

The defense lawyer's law firm provided fall information.

[025-T-038]