On December 21, 2015, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel was heard in the brain injury lawsuit, Helen M. Eason, Administratrix of the Estate of Mary Francis Taylor, Deceased v. Sentara CarePlex Hospital, No. CL12-470 in Circuit Court of Hampton, Virginia. Sentara was ordered to answer and respond completely re its standards, criterias, guidelines, directives, policies, procedures and/or protocols, as well as its internal orientation, staff development and/or other in-service/clinical/educational materials, re toileting, bowel movements, urine output, tube/other feeding and/or rounding, monitoring and other checking of patients.

The Eason medical malpractice case requires Sentara to provide such responsive “policies” and “teaching” information/materials that are applicable hospital-wide and by individual unit (PCU and ICU). Further, re rounding, monitoring, and other checking of the patient, Sentara’s response must cover any special policies and teaching for patients like Plaintiff’s deceased on ventilator and/or tube/other feeding.

In the Eason patient fall lawsuit, Sentara also is required to identify its most knowledgeable persons on topics designated by Plaintiff, though not the source of every discovery response. Additionally, Eason found sufficient Sentara’s responses about its “electronic” ICU, based on Sentara’s representation that it already had provided all responsive information/materials.

Practice pointer: Eason medical malpractice discovery shows that simple reference to “EICU” in the patient chart denotes that Sentara actually was using audio-visual in the patient’s ICU room to treat from a remote central location outside of the hospital facility (even though patient charting by Sentara’s remote healthcare providers do not necessarily acknowledge that they were not on premises). Follow-up discovery on Sentara’s EICU practices should be undertaken.

Finally, the Court ruled that Sentara had to verify all of its Answers and Responses under oath in the Eason patient fall litigation. In Eason, the unattended patient fell trying to get to the bathroom by herself and suffered permanent brain injury

THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR REQUIRES ALL LAWYERS TO POST THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMERS ON ALL CASE-RELATED POSTS. MR. WATERMAN’S CASE RESULTS AND CLIENT TESTIMONIALS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE. THEY DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE BY HIM.