Ohio: Malpractice Payment of $9,850,000 for Injury to a Female Infant (2007)

In 2007, a medical malpractice insurance company made a payment on behalf of an osteopathic physician (DO) in Ohio for approximately* $9,850,000. Payment was made in response to a claim of medical malpractice claim involving what was described as a "major permanent injury" to a female infant under the age of one year. The nature of the claim is broadly described as: "anesthesia related." The payment report submitted by a medical malpractice payer described the allegations in the claim as "Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated" and "Failure to Recognize a Complication."

* The payment amount is approximate because the National Practitioner Data Bank codes payments as a range value. The report's description of $9,850,000 corresponds to a malpractice payment somewhere between $9,800,001 and $9,900,000.

Claim at a Glance

Year of Payment: 2007

Location: Ohio

First Allegation: Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated

Second Allegation: Failure to Recognize a Complication

Act or Omission: 2001

Second Act or Omission: 2001

Payment Range: Between $9,800,001 and $9,900,000

Nature of Claim: Anesthesia Related

Payer: Insurance Company - Primary Coverage

Type of Care: Inpatient

Reporter: A Medical Malpractice Payer

Claim Insights

With respect to any medical malpractice payment, there are three major components of any claim. First, there is the act or omission that gave rise to an injury and whether the provider departed from an accepted standard of practice. Second, there is the nature of the injury itself, which includes several factors like its severity, duration, the impact on the patient’s life, the age and general health of the patient, along with many other elements. Third, there needs to be a causal connection between the negligent act or omission by the provider and the injury itself. Even with a showing of negligence, a medical provider is not legally responsible for an outcome that was not caused by the negligence.

With this in mind, the Data Bank does have some information that can give context to the medical malpractice payments, including the patient’s age, gender, whether it was inpatient or outpatient care, the type of malpractice or medical mistake that was alleged, and the ultimate outcome to the patient.

The information has significant limitations, however, that everyone should keep in mind. For one thing, the information is usually self-reported by the healthcare provider and his or her representatives. When reviewing this information, you should consider whether the patient would have described his or her injury as “minor” or “temporary” or “emotional only.” Further, there are important aspects of any claim valuation that simply cannot work in a database. Flagrant negligence might be coded the same way as what could be described as a smaller error, and one would have no way of knowing from these data. But even with these limitations and even where some required information is missing from any particular report, each of the payment reports in the database have enough to provide some insightful information that can help evaluate medical malpractice claims going forward.

This Provider Has Two Malpractice Payments in the Database

A medical provider's malpractice history can be extremely insightful. A long history of malpractice claims and discipline can certainly affect whether a matter is resolved and for how much. One of the most important goals of the National Practitioner Data Bank is to track providers' disciplinary and malpractice payment history throughout interstate moves or new employment situations.

In addition to this particular malpractice payment, this provider has another report on record. Specifically, this provider has a total of two malpractice payments in the database. To put this number in perspective, throughout over 200,000 payment records, approximately 55% of them are associated with providers with multiple payments. This provider's total of two malpractice payments is more than 62% of all providers in the database, which is limited to providers with malpractice payment history.

Provider Detail

Alerts 2


Osteopathic Physician (DO)

Age: Between 40 and 50 Years Old in 2001 When Allegations Arose

Education Completed: Between 1990 and 2000

Malpractice Payments 2
There are other payments in the database associated with this provider:
2007Ohio$4,450,000Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated
2007Ohio$9,850,000Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated

Similar Claims

Here are other claims involving an allegation of Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated and an outcome of what was described as a "major permanent injury" to a infant under one year of age.
2022Texas$97,500Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated
2018Arkansas$745,000Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated
2009Oklahoma$125,000Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated
2007Ohio$4,450,000Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated
2007Ohio$9,850,000Failure to Delay a Case When Indicated