Brain Damaged Child’s Family Received 36.5 Million Dollars Compensation in A Malpractice Suit

Court awarded 36.5 million dollars to a brain damaged child’s family in a medical malpractice law suit in Burlington. This is probably the largest settlement in state history.

Thomas and Sheila Cowles’s baby Nicholas was born brain damaged and blind. “It is absolutely the saddest thing I have ever seen” said Julie Torres who was the jury foreman.

She says after five weeks of testimony at Waterbury Superior Court the decision was unanimous. “Every juror had agreed Hartford Hospital and Dr. Doelger were both negligent” Torres said. The jury believed evidence that showed Dr. Doelger and the nurses at Hartford Hospital failed to properly read fetal monitor strips that showed baby Nicholas was in trouble.

The jury found the hospital liable for sixty percent of the damages, and the doctor at fault for forty percent. Cowles family received 500-thousand dollars for past medical bills, 19.5 million dollars for future medical bills and 16.5 million dollars for pain and suffering.

Link

Filed under General Law, Medical Malpractice, Settlements

You may also like to read

One Response to “Brain Damaged Child’s Family Received 36.5 Million Dollars Compensation in A Malpractice Suit”

  1. Bob H Says:

    I work in the medical malpractice insurance field and was researching reports on the Cowles case. I am amazed at the inaccuracy in the reporting of a jury verdict. You can be sure the family did not “receive(d) 36.5 million dollars compensation”. That was only the amount awarded by the jury, not the amount of U.S. dollar funds they ultimately received.
    WFSB said “A medical malpractice suit leads to the largest settlement in state history” without any factual basis to know if there had been a settlement. Confusing a settlement with a potentially uncollectable jury verdict is akin to stuffing ones pockets with Monopoly money and saying “I’m a millionaire”.
    As the Cowles verdict was not appealed and both sides agreed to confidentiality, I took as accurate the statement made to me by someone in the industry that the parties proceeded to trial under a “high/low” agreement. The jury verdict would have likely been higher than the high end of the “high/low”.

Leave a Reply



Please enter the code shown below ( to verify that you are human ) before you click Submit Comment.


Protected by Comment Guard Pro