FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/10/ :01 PM

Transcription

1 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/10/ :01 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 24 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/10/2016 EXHIBIT A

2 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ANNETTE RUIZ, - against - Plaintiff, NEW YORK CITY HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORP., LEAQUE AHMED, M.D. and PARITOSH SUMAN, M.D., Index No: /15 PLAINTIFF'S VERIFIED BILL OF PARTICULARS TO DEFENDANT, LEAQUE AHMED, M.D. Defendants. Plaintiff, ANNETTE RUIZ, by her attorneys, OKUN, ODDO & BABAT, P.C., sets forth the following as her Verified Bill of Particulars in response to the demands of defendant, LEAQUE AHMED, M.D.: 1. The plaintiff was born on At the time 'the_ action was commenced and at present, the plaintiff resides at Disclosing plaintiffs Social Security Number in the course of litigatipn makes that information public, and is impermissible pursuant to New York State Gene-01' Btisiness Law 899-aa, 5 U.S.C. 552[b][6] and the Federal Privacy Act of 1974 (Public Law ) 7. To do so has been held to be "an unwarranted invasion of privacy". See, Kupferberg v. State of New York, 97 Misc. 2d 519; 411 N.Y.S.2d 790; 1978 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS See also, Norwood v. FAA, 993 F.2d 570; International Brotherhood of Electric Workers v. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, 852 F. 2d 87; Bibeau v. Cantiague Figure Skating Club, Inc., 294 A.D.2d 525, 742 N.Y.S.2d 864 (2nd Dept. 2002); Seelig v. Sielaff, 201 A.D.2d 298, 607 N.Y.S.2d 300 (1st Dept. 1994).

3 2. Set forth a general statement of the acts and/or omissions that are claimed to constitute a departure from good and accepted medical practice: The defendant, LEAGUE AHMED, M.D., his agents, servants and/or employees was negligent in failing to use reasonable and proper skill in providing medical and surgical care and treatment to the plaintiff, ANNETTE RUIZ; in failing to obtain a complete and accurate history of the plaintiff; in failing to conduct a proper, careful, adequate, thorough, accurate, ongoing physical examination of the plaintiff; in failing to notify the plaintiff of the known risks and/or hazards of the treatment and/or procedures performed; in failing to order and conduct appropriate and accurate examinations of the plaintiff; in causing or permitting the plaintiff to experience a necrotic bowel incarcerated in an umbilical hernia causing bowel obstruction; in failing to closely monitor the plaintiff's post-surgical status; in failing to appreciate that plaintiff's condition was worsening and required emergent surgical intervention; in negligently and unnecessarily causing plaintiff to experience a necrotic bowel incarcerated in an umbilical hernia; in failing to recognize patient's history and symptoms; in failing to follow and monitor the symptomatology of the plaintiff; in failing to have the available, necessary, appropriate, proper consultations prevailing in said community; in failing to use reasonable care under the circumstances to diagnose, evaluate and appreciate the progression of signs and conditions which existed and developed in order to commence and recommend indicated, necessary surgical intervention/treatment to repair the hernia and resulting complications and sequelae, including bowel obstruction. The defendant was further negligent in failing to be cognizant and aware of the plaintiff's pathology; in failing to treat the plaintiff's condition in accordance with accepted medical and surgical practices; in negligently failing to repair the umbilical hernia; in failing to realize the

4 limitations of his expertise and call for appropriate guidance/consultative/coordination in performing surgery before plaintiffs hemodynamic/cardiopulmonic status was so severely compromised; in failing to use the best judgment and reasonable care in the treatment of the plaintiff; in negligently causing plaintiff unnecessary pain and suffering; in failing to use that degree of care, skill and caution and judgment commensurate with and required by the circumstances then and there existing; in failing to call the necessary, indicated and proper consultations prevailing in said community The defendant was further negligent in failing and neglecting to provide plaintiff with enough information about her condition to make an informed consent; in negligently failing,to develop a therapeutic working management plan to treat her condition in conjunction with a differential diagnosis; in failing to order and interpret diagnostic tests; in failing to provide proper indicated medical and surgical care and treatment in accordance with accepted medical and surgical practice, customs, procedures and standards as indicated by plaintiffs symptomatology. The defendant was further negligent by omitting the proper care and caution for the health, safety and welfare of the plaintiff and anticipated enjoyment of life; in negligently failing to advise and coordinate indicated, immediate medical/surgical care and treatment for the umbilical hernia; in failing to properly follow-up on plaintiffs condition in accordance with accepted medical and surgical practice, customs and standards of medical and surgical care, treatment and hospitalizations then and there prevailing in the community, and all of the above actions and omissions constituted a departure from and failure to conform to accepted and proper standards of medical and surgical care, treatment and hospitalizations then and there prevailing in the community, and said constituted acts and omissions are negligent.

5 3. The date of defendant's alleged negligence is June 10, 2013 through and including June 12, (a). (b) Dates of last and first services rendered by defendant: See Item 3, supra. The place where the services were rendered, and care and treatment given by the defendant is at Harlem Hospital, 506 Lenox Avenue, New York, New York Defendant, LEAQUE AHMED, M.D., negligently failed to repair a hernia intraoperatively during gastric bypass surgery. This failure was a substantial contributing factor in causing the loop of the necrotic bowel incarcerated in an umbilical hernia causing bowel obstruction Items of special damages will be provided when available. 12. Name of each and every member or employee of defendant that negligently administered treatment. This information is within the exclusive knowledge of the defendant. 13. Not applicable. Plaintiff is not claiming any defective, inappropriate or insufficient equipment or instrument. 14. Improper demand for a Bill of Particulars; within the exclusive knowledge of the defendants Inappropriate and improper demand for a Bill of Particulars. 17. The plaintiff was scheduled for a surgical procedure to repair a hernia and gastric by bypass on June 10, As a result of the negligence, malpractice and wrongdoing of the defendant, LEAQUE AHMED, M.D., through his agents, servants and/or employees, the plaintiff was caused to suffer and sustain multiple serious personal injuries including conscious pain and

6 suffering, as follows: Necrotic bowel incarcerated in umbilical hernia Failed gastric bypass Small bowel obstruction Multiple admissions to hospital and visits to emergency rooms Small bowel resection with primary anastomosis on June 16, 2013, at Woodhull Hospital 10 cm of bowel removed Surgery on June 13, 2013 at Woodhull Hospital Infected umbilical hernia incision Intensive Care Unit Nasogastric tube Wound and dressing care Intubation and ventilator Ventilator care Intravenous lines and medication Pain management Antibiotics Surgical debridement of umbilical incision on July 3, 2013 and September 18, 2013 at Woodhull Hospital; 11 x 6 x 6 mm soft tissue recollection in anterior abdomen 19. Name and address of each and every subsequent physician medical treatment or consultation was sought. 20. Name and address of each and every physician seen by plaintiff for consultation, physical examination and/or medical tests at the direction or referral of legal counsel. Not applicable.

7 21. Set forth each and every condition the defendant exacerbated. See Items 5 through 9, supra Name and address of each hospital with dates of confinement or outpatient treatment. Plaintiff was admitted to Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center in Brooklyn, New York, on the following dates: June 16, 2013 through July 1, 2013 July 2, 2013 through July 4, 2013 September 13, 2013 through September 20, 2013 Multiple Emergency Room visits at Woodhull Hospital from June, Dates of confinement to bed and home: one year: Plaintiff was confined to bed for ten months and was confined to her home for 25. No claims for any loss of earnings are being made. 26. Not applicable. No special educational, emotional or vocational training or schooling has been sought by the plaintiff. 27. No other lawsuit has been commenced on behalf of the plaintiff. 28. Plaintiff will ask the Court to take judicial notice of applicable statutes, laws and ordinances at the time of trial. Dated: New York, New York May 8, 2015 By: OKUN, DDO BABAT, P.C. Mar a Jona. q. Attorneys laintiff ANNETT 8 West 38th Street, Suite 1002 New York, New York (212) File: 7018

8 TO: AARONSON RAPPAPORT FEINSTEIN & DEUTSCH, LLP Attorneys for Defendants NEW YORK CITY HEALTH AND HOSPITAL CORP., LEAQUE AHMED, M.D. and PARITOSH SUMAN, M.D. 600 Third Avenue New York, New York (212) File: