Boy suffers seizure, school district must cough up $7.6 million

Grenadier

Sr. Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
10,826
Reaction score
617
This is a lose-lose situation for the school district. On one hand, they're going to have to fork over a lot of money for this, and given the state of that district, the funds aren't going to be easy to find. On the other hand, if they contest this award, then they're going to end up looking like the bad guys.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070409/ap_on_re_us/seizure_award_1

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr09/0,4670,SeizureAward,00.html

LOS ANGELES — A jury ordered the Los Angeles Unified School District to pay $7.6 million to the family of an epileptic boy who suffered a seizure at school and is now paralyzed in a minimally conscious state.

Steve Martinez's family claimed the district was liable for the boy's injuries, saying the response to his April 18, 2005, seizure was inadequate.
The district argued that adults responded almost immediately and tried to save the fourth-grader, but good-faith efforts to administer CPR were unsuccessful.

What raises an eyebrow, is that this has happened before:

An earlier jury had awarded the family $361,237 after a 2003 seizure during which Steve suffered burns after falling on the playground atop a metal utility plate heated by the sun. A visiting Marine and the school nurse successfully administered CPR in that case.

The district had offered free transportation for Steve to another school that had a full-time nurse, but his mother rejected it, saying it was "too far from our home and had too many students."

Sometimes I wonder why the mother rejected this offer? If I had a child that had a medical condition, I wouldn't want him attending a school that did not have full time medical personnel.
 

mrhnau

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
34
Location
NC
God forbid the child get injured at home. Who would they sue then? The doctors perhaps?

If the school was truly negligent, I could see the problem, but teachers are not wanting kids to get injured... I just thnk as a society we are too sue happy. Things like this just bug me...
 

Jonathan

Blue Belt
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
249
Reaction score
0
Location
VA, USA
The problem I'm seeing with this is the 'good faith' statement. Teachers are not medical professionals. Nurses and doctors can only do so much, especially if a child is prone to seizures.

I won't say that the family is money-grubbing... they're likely dealing with the grief of injury to their child in someway, anyway, to try to cope with it. It's easier to get made at someone- anyone- instead of having to deal with a situation that amounts to 'this kind of thing happens, sadly'.

What I'd really be concerned with are 'copycats' following this formula in the future, in the hopes of getting a payoff.
 

MetalStorm

Green Belt
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
115
Reaction score
1
Pretty sad, If I was the one who got to decide and I saw that they already offered another school that could handle the situation better and got turned down they would get nothing.

I can understand sueing and getting a ton of money if someone does something utterly stupid and you suffer because of it but these people did what they could to help by the sounds of it.
 

jdinca

Master Black Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
11
Location
SF Bay Area
Looks like a cash cow to me. I feel sorry for the kid.

I am wondering why in both cases they were doing CPR on a epileptic who had a seizure. It's rarely a fatal event.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
430
Location
Cromwell,CT
Yes, this is a sad situation. As with any article, questions always arise.

According to the family, five to 10 minutes passed before CPR began because no adult was supervising the boy. The playground supervisor who administered CPR also acknowledged lacking specific CPR training; she testified she attended most of a one-day first aid course in the 1960s. The school district noted that a staff member with CPR training was assisting her.

Reading this, it almost comes across as if there was supposed to be someone specifically assigned to watch THIS child. If thats not the case..well, its been a long time since I was in school and longer since I had a recess, but I don't believe there was more than a few teachers, so yes, I can see how a time lapse could've happened. Additionally, the CPR courses are most likely a one day session. I have to wonder, as there was no mention, but was the school nurse notified? I would imagine that the nurse would've been able to provide better care, as I would think that their certifications would be more up to date than a teacher. Additionally, I saw no mention of anyone calling 911. Not saying this didn't happen, but I don't know because there was nothing said.

"They had every reason to be prepared because of their own experience with Steve, because of the mother and doctors cautioning them, and because they had already been through a lawsuit," said family attorney Philip Michels.
An earlier jury had awarded the family $361,237 after a 2003 seizure during which Steve suffered burns after falling on the playground atop a metal utility plate heated by the sun. A visiting Marine and the school nurse successfully administered CPR in that case.

Any metal surface in the Summer months is going to get hot. IMHO, this child, given his medical condition, should be limited with his activity. If a simple fall is enough to set off a seizure, he should be closely watched.

The district had offered free transportation for Steve to another school that had a full-time nurse, but his mother rejected it, saying it was "too far from our home and had too many students."

Well, after reading this, its possible no nurse was even at the school.
 

Kacey

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
16,462
Reaction score
227
Location
Denver, CO
I have a real problem with this verdict... on the one hand, I can understand why the parents sued - but on the other hand, I disagree with the outcome. The parents had the opportunity to send the child to a school with a nurse, and chose not to do so. The school made a good-faith effort to aid the child, and it was not effective. Now, if the child was so medically fragile/at risk that he needed to be near a person trained in CPR all the time, and the family chose not to send him somewhere that such services were available, then they are negligent.... perhaps the school district should sue them in return.
 

Ping898

Senior Master
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
3,669
Reaction score
25
Location
Earth
Let's hope on appeal a smarter verdict comes out...
 

Touch Of Death

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
May 6, 2003
Messages
11,610
Reaction score
849
Location
Spokane Valley WA
Let's hope on appeal a smarter verdict comes out...
They will get the award down to a more managable amount. Juries will give pople just about anything based on their emotions; however, reality will prevail. Even the Mc Donald's coffee crotch lady had to settle for less than was originaly awarded by sympatheic jurors.
Sean
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
430
Location
Cromwell,CT
I have a real problem with this verdict... on the one hand, I can understand why the parents sued - but on the other hand, I disagree with the outcome. The parents had the opportunity to send the child to a school with a nurse, and chose not to do so. The school made a good-faith effort to aid the child, and it was not effective. Now, if the child was so medically fragile/at risk that he needed to be near a person trained in CPR all the time, and the family chose not to send him somewhere that such services were available, then they are negligent.... perhaps the school district should sue them in return.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the court room. The school, as you said, made an effort to provide transportation to and from, in addition to the fact that this school has a FT nurse and the parents declined.

I'm not a lawyer, so I dont know how much, if at all, this will effect the decision.

Mike
 

Jade Tigress

RAWR
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 11, 2004
Messages
14,196
Reaction score
153
Location
Chicago
I have a real problem with this verdict... on the one hand, I can understand why the parents sued - but on the other hand, I disagree with the outcome. The parents had the opportunity to send the child to a school with a nurse, and chose not to do so. The school made a good-faith effort to aid the child, and it was not effective. Now, if the child was so medically fragile/at risk that he needed to be near a person trained in CPR all the time, and the family chose not to send him somewhere that such services were available, then they are negligent.... perhaps the school district should sue them in return.

I agree Kacey, and as a parent, I can't understand why those parents did not accept the safer option for their child in another school. It is a sad situation for all involved. It will be interesting to see what the courts have to say about it.
 

mrhnau

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
34
Location
NC
Here is the problem
Touch of Death said:
Even the Mc Donald's coffee crotch lady had to settle for less than was originaly awarded by sympatheic jurors.

How many people knew about this? If someone settles, or a lesser verdict comes out, its alot less likely to get alot of press. So, it might work out, but its likely it won't be as well published...
 

Latest Discussions

Top