Skip to main content
Ellen Marie Mccarthy

Ellen Mccarthy’s Legal Cases

13 total


  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Car accident
    Outcome:
    $900,000
    Description:
    Plaintiff was hit head-on by tortfeasor who paid policy limits of $50,000. Plaintiff sustained closed head injury causing memory loss, confusion, and depression. Defendant expert claimed injuries were due to Epstein Barr Syndrome, not head injury. Plaintiff sustained mild deceleration type closed head injury, low back and knee pain. Defendant claimed that plaintiff's injures were minimal based on the deployment of the airbag and the fact that he had no visible signs of injury.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Car accident
    Outcome:
    $657,686
    Description:
    Collision where plaintiff was rear-ended by a nine-ton U.S. Postal truck. Defendant disputed liability claiming that a phantom vehicle caused the postal truck to rear-end the plaintiff while traveling 40 m.p.h. Plaintiff sustained cervical disc herniation at C-5-6 and C-6-7, compression fracture L-3, and impotence.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Motorcycle accident
    Outcome:
    $500,000
    Description:
    Plaintiff was driving a motorcyle southbound in left lane when tortfeasor allegedly pulled into his lane from curb, cutting him off. Tortfeasor, whose carrier paid $12,500 limits, claimed she was always in left lane and was rear-ended by plaintiff. No witnesses except three passengers in tortfeasor's car. The jury did not believe the tortfeasor or his passengers.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Medical malpractice
    Outcome:
    $380,000
    Description:
    Our client was a 53-year-old church volunteer and Sweet Adelines chorus coordinator who fell, spraining her ankle in May. She began treating with defendant orthopedic surgeon over the summer months. When symptoms did not resolve, surgery was recommended. Prior to surgery, plaintiff signed a two-page consent for surgery form which erroneously indicated the surgery was going to be performed on the uninjured ankle. Plaintiff was only shown the second page of the form and signed it. Defendant performed ligament surgery on the uninjured ankle, tighening up the ligaments, thereby greatly reducing the flexibility of the ankle, and causing her dormant osteochondritis to become symptomatic. Plaintiff shortly thereafter had surgical repair of the sprained ankle. The original injury healed appropriately but the ankle on which the defendant negligently operated caused significant pain and dysfunction, requiring special shoes and orthotic inserts. An independent medical examination was conducted by the defense which concluded that the surgery to the uninjured ankle caused little disability. Trial commended against the defendant who did not appear at trial. Defense contended that the plaintiff consented to the surgery when she signed the consent form and that the defense expert's opinion was that the surgery to the uninjured ankle did little, if any, harm. Like the defendant, the defense expert failed to appear at trial.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Construction and development
    Outcome:
    $4,100,000
    Description:
    Plaintiff was a 42- year-old mason working at a construction site. His foreman erected scaffolding which permitted access onto an unguarded elevated walkway also under construction. The elevated walkway's surface consisted of deck pans which were uneven. The foreman recognized the need for an extension ladder to provide access from the ground to the work station but failed to ensure its delivery. To access the work platform, plaintiff climbed the crossbraces of the scaffold and alighted onto the unguarded elevated walkway where he lost his footing and fell 25 feet to the ground. As a result of the fall, plaintiff sustained a spinal cord injury and is paralyzed from the chest down. Defendant claimed that injury to plaintiff was not substantially certain to occur.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Medical malpractice
    Outcome:
    $2,000,000
    Description:
    Plaintiff sustained brain damage due to failure to timely diagnose meningitis. On November 13, 1994, our client, a minor, became acutely ill with a high fever and was seen at a local emergency room. The minor, four months old at the time, was suffering from a fever, constant crying, cough, and congestion. He was first triaged to an area for less seriously ill patients before he was sent to the emergency room for evaluation because of the fever. A variety of tests were ordered, including blood culture, CBC with differential, electrolytes, and chest x-ray. A blood culture was ordered to determine if a bacterial infection was present. Usually results are not available for 36-48 hours. The standard of medical care is to treat infants with antibiotics pending the final results of the cultures, usually 48 hours, based on the seriousness of a possible bacterial blood infection. No antibiotics were administered pending the results of these tests. This is despite the fact that the infant had an elevated white blood count which was clearly abnormal and indicative of a bacterial infection. Despite this, the baby was discharged home at 12:20 a.m on November 14, 1994. The minor's parents followed up the next morning by bringing the minor to his attending pediatrician who immediately admitted the infant to the hospital. The minor was begun on IV antibiotics for a presumptive diagnosis of sepsis, and then transferred to a tentiary level hospital that evening diagnosed with pneumococcal meningitis and pneumococcal septicemia. As a result of the failure to diagnose and appropriately treat the bacterial pneumococcal meningitis, our client became severely neurologically devastated and severly handicapped.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Construction and development
    Outcome:
    $950,000
    Description:
    Our client was a 29-year-old heavy equipment operator who suffered a near-amputation of his foot. The settling defendants were the worker's employer and the equipment maintenance company. The incident occurred when the front fork of a large tow motor, on which the parking brake had been set, rolled into plaintiff's ankle. Our client's claims were based on the defectiveness of the parking brake and the failure to repair it despite knowledge of its defective condition. Our client's job duties required him to operate the tow motor to move heavy pots filled with molten metal. During this process, the plaintiff would set down a full pot in the yard and apply the parking brake before exiting the cab. On this particular day, he applied the brake, exited the cab, and was tightening the lid on a pot, when the tow motor suddenly rolled forward. One of the forks speared his leg just above the ankle, severing it part way through the bone. Immediately afterward, the plant manager verified that the parking brake was set and took written statements from an employee who heard the parking brake engage and saw the tow motor roll forward. Prior to this incident, the tow motor operator on a prior shift notified the employer that, during the week before the plaintiff's injury, the parking brake was not holding. Nevertheless, the vehicle was not taken out of service, nor did management call anyone to inspect or repair it. The employer's plant manager testified that if management had been notified that the parking brake was not holding the tow motor in place after it was engaged, it was mandatory that the tow motor be removed from service. He also testified that leaving it in service after such notification created a dangerous condition where injury was substantially certain to occur. The tow motor was maintained by an outside contractor. This co-defendant determined several months before the accident that the tow motor's brake system was full of oil sludge and needed to be flushed. It also determined that the parking brake's spring brake chamber needed to be replaced. The co-defendant's mechanic testified that, if the spring brake chamber had sludge in it, the parking brake would not hold the tow motor in place. There was, however, no evidence in the maintenance records kept by this co-defendant that the entire brake system was ever flushed; and the spring brake chamber was not replaced until after the accident. Plaintiff's engineering expert testified that the spring brake chamber was contaminated with sludge, causing the brake shoes not to fully engage, thus allowing the tow motor to move after the parking brake was applied. Plaintiff's expert also testified that the vehicle should have been removed from service immediately after the malfunction had been reported, and that it should not have been put back into service until they could either explain the episodic failure or fix it. The treating physician testified that the plaintiff sustained a near amputation injury, which makes it impossible for him to return to this type of work, and that he is now relegated to sedentary or light duty jobs. The employer's experts opined that the plaintiff's engineering expert's theory was impossible and there was no real explanation for the accident. The maintenance company hired an expert who opined that the parking brake must not have been applied by the plaintiff when he exited the cab. The orthopaedic surgeon retained by the employer to examine the plaintiff opined that his near-amputation injury was caused by him tripping and falling over the fork rather than by the fork rolling into him. That surgeon did concede, however, that in his 40 years of trauma surgery he never saw this type of injury caused by a trip and fall, nor had he heard or read of such an occurrence in medical literature.
  • Jane Doe vs. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Wrongful death
    Outcome:
    $285,000
    Description:
    Plaintiff's decedent, a 14-year-old, died of diabetic shock after her family doctor failed to diagnosis her with diabetes and negligently diagnosed her with a urinary tract infection instead. Defendant argued that plaintiff did not present with symptoms indicative of diabetes.
  • John Doe v. John Doe

    Practice Area:
    Medical malpractice
    Date:
    Oct 01, 2010
    Outcome:
    900,000
    Description:
    Surgeon failed to remove one of two polyps in the colon. Resulted in subsequent removal of large part of colon.
  • John Doe v. John Doe Inc.

    Practice Area:
    Aviation
    Outcome:
    Confidential
    Description:
    Airplane crash. Catastrophic injuries.