Lasix Prescription Misfilled by Pharmacy - Heart Attack and Death - Confidential Washington Settlement
27 Jul 2007
In 1993, Decedent was sixty-three years old and had longstanding heart problems including an approximate eighty percent coronary artery blockage and chronic pulmonary edema. Decedent had been prescribed Lasix (a diuretic) for years to assist in shedding water to assist his pulmonary edema.
In February 1992 he presented a prescription for 100 eighty milligram tablets of Lasix to the defendant pharmacy and pharmacist and was provided a bottle of 100 forty milligram tablets of Lasix in a bottle labeled 100 eighty milligram tablets. As his previous prescription was consumed, he began to use the new tablets, which provided insufficient doses of Lasix.
The decedent began to experience fatigue. In May 1992, he suffered a cardiac arrest. Decedent was hospitalized until June 1992 when he died from a second arrest.
The doctor who conducted surgery on decedent following decedent's initial arrest testified the decrease in Lasix was "more likely than not" a cause of plaintiff's arrest which was a cause of his ultimate death by v-fib and arrest. Reasonable medical probability is established if something is said to be "more likely than not."
Decedent's treating physician testified a decrease in Lasix could cause an increase in pulmonary edema but did not believe decedent's decrease was a cause of his death. This testimony, coming from a treating physician, created a factual issue normally decided by a jury.
Both defendant's experts testified the decrease in Lasix was not a cause of decedent's death and that no literature existed to support the hypothesis. Negative opinions on the critical issue of causation are often provided by outside experts hired by the defense.
The trial court dismissed plaintiffs case on summary judgment. Plaintiffs appealed. Division Two reversed and remanded whereupon the parties settled the case. According to a published account, this case settled for a confidential amount.
This case illustrates the obstacles to be overcome in seeking damages even for an obviously misfilled prescription when faced with the resouces available to the defense. Persistence and strong representation prevailed in this instance.
