Ms Johnson explored the option of Lasik surgery as a possible path to getting rid of her contacts forever. Her surgeon told her that she would be a good candidate for another kind of procedure called STAAR Visian ICL. In this surgery, she would have a new lens permanently implanted in each eye.
On the day of the surgery, her surgeon first implanted the lens in Johnsonâ€™s right eye. He noticed a problem but didnâ€™t bring Johnson out of anesthesia to consult with her and he didnâ€™t contact her husband in the waiting room. Instead, he went ahead and repeated the procedure for her left eye. The complication was now apparent in both eyes. Basically, the implants didnâ€™t fit. Pressure began building inside Johnsonâ€™s eyes and she had to be hospitalized. Unfortunately, the surgeon did not immediately remove the lenses, and the high intraocular pressures were slowly damaging her optic nerves. Six weeks following the original surgery, the doctor finally removed the implanted lens from each eye but it was too late. Johnsonâ€™s vision was permanently damaged.
Estate of Rickey Hicks v. Cascade Landscape and Irrigation, Inc.
Jul 23, 2010
Rickey Hicks was married to the love of his life, Barbara Hicks, for over 32 years when he died suddenly in his home after receiving Botox injections for headaches.
The headaches were a result of a fractured neck he received in a four car chair-reaction motor vehicle collision he was involved in nearly a year earlier. Rickey suffered permanent headaches due to the fracture. His doctors prescribed various pain medications, including Botox injections, to help control the headaches. Ultimately, the combination of medications resulted in his death.
Barbara Hicks had accompanied her husband to various medical appointments throughout his recovery. She knew he suffered extremely from the headaches and hoped he would have good relief from the Botox injection. The last thing she expected was the injection would lead to his death.
Rickey Hicks was 51 years old and retired when he died without warning. His family was left grieving with questions about the cause of his death. They contacted a local attorney in their area who, in turn, brought Greg Zeuthen in to the case. Barbara Hicks said, â€œ"Greg was very knowledgeable, professional and handled everything wonderfully. It was very good to have the help and took a big load off of my shoulders. He was great."
The corporation that caused the crash initially claimed it was not responsible for Mr. Hicks' death. However, Greg contacted qualified medical experts, including Mr. Hickâ€™s treating doctor, who confirmed the use of both narcotic pain medication and Botox suppressed Mr. Hicks' ability to breathe, which ultimately resulted in his death.
Relying on Oregon law Greg held corporation that caused the car crash fully responsible for Mr. Hickâ€™s death.
Gary Gasper Refractive Surgery Case
Sep 03, 2009
Plaintiff Verdict for $580,000
When Gary Gasper had Lasik surgery the laser was misprogrammed, causing severe eye damage. The case was tried in August and September 2009. Mr. Gasper hired Gregory Zeuthen and Larry Baron to represent him.
"If I had not found Larry and Greg I truly believe my life would be much different. Our travel through the legal system was unbelievable--from doctors to court, I never once felt that they were not there to protect me. The communication was excellent and prompt I was never out of the loop no matter how trivial it was. I have and I will recommend them to anyone who asks. The whole firm is professional and extremely caring".
Warren v. Medical Eye Center
Aug 12, 2009
Plaintiff Verdict for $215,000
Debbi Warren always had good 20/20 vision, but as she aged, she developed presbyopiaâ€”a condition in which the natural lens of the eye loses its ability to focus for near vision. She used reading glasses bought off the shelf for reading, but they were always getting lost.
She heard that Dr. Paul Imperia, a Medford ophthalmologist, promised surgical procedures were available to eliminate or reduce the need for glasses. She saw Dr. Imperia, who recommended monovisionâ€”a vision system in which one eye is purposely made near sighted for near vision tasks while the other eye is left alone for distance vision tasks, like driving. His office gave Mrs. Warren a minimal test to see if she was a good candidate, which she passed. However, Mrs. Warren was concerned. She had tried unsuccessfully to adapt to monovision a couple of years previously. A local optometrist gave her a contact lens to wear in her left eye to make it nearsighted. Mrs. Warren wore the contact lens for two weeks but could not get used to the imbalance in the vision between her two eyes. She gave up the attempt, as she suffered from nausea, headaches, and lack of depth perception. When Dr. Imperia told her that monovision was the answer to her needs, she told him that she failed a contact lens monovision test two years previously. Dr. Imperial had his hand on the door, as he responded quickly that she need not to worry about her earlier contact lens test. Trusting Dr. Imperia, Mrs. Warren went ahead with the recommended procedure.
The results were disastrous. Mrs. Warren experienced the same problems she had with the contact lenses. She struggled for months to function and eventually a second surgery was performed, which was helpful, but which did not eliminate all of her vision related problems. Mrs. Warren does not favor lawsuits, especially suits against doctors, but she felt that Dr. Imperial should have taken the time to consider better her concerns. At a weeklong trial in August 2009, evidence was introduced that a person failing a contact lens test for monovision is not a good candidate for monovision. Mrs. Warren argued that only if only Dr. Imperia stopped to consider carefully her concerns, he likely would have recommended against monovision. At a minimum, he should have repeated a contact lens test. In the end, a jury agreed with Mrs. Warren that Dr. Imperia was negligent, finding in her favor and awarding her both non-economic and economic damages.
Debbi Warren: â€œMr. Baron and Mr. Zeuthen are lawyers who leave no stone unturned when it comes to representing their clients. They went toe-to-toe with all of the medical specialists that were against us because they were incredibly knowledgeable about the eye and my condition. They are professional, they keep in close contact with their clients, they have impeccable integrity, and they are GOOD! Most of all, they care about their clients as individuals, not just another case. Thank you so much for all of the hard work you did on my behalf.â€
Morin v. Weston
Apr 11, 2002
Plaintiff Verdict for $420,000
Leo Morin wanted lighter glasses and glasses that weighed less. His prescription made his lenses big and heavy. Because he worked as an industrial electrician, his eye glasses doubled as safety glasses. They had to be actually made out of glass and not a lighter plastic material.
Lasik surgery seemed to be the answer. He had surgery on both eyes on June 15, 2000. In the days following surgery, he began to realize something wasn't right. His left eye, in particular, was worse. At eye exams, when he was asked to look at the eye chart on the wall, he couldn't make out any letters.
He learned he had not been a good candidate for Lasik surgery. The combination of his pupil size and the refraction of his eye meant he would have problems. He also learned that the doctors literally plugged the wrong refraction into the computer.
"The idea of suing someone was foreign to me," Morin says. "I don't think of myself as a confrontational type person." Yet, as he considered his situation and conversed more with other victims or Lasik surgery, legal action became a real option. He made contact with Lawrence Baron and Greg Zeuthen.
"Greg and Larry reminded me of Gary Cooper in High Noon," recalls Morin. "You could tell they knew a lot about Lasik surgery. I thought, 'These are the guys.'"
The case went before a Lane County Circuit Court jury in Eugene on April 9, 2002. On April 11, the jury came back with a verdict against the doctor and awarded Morin $420,000 in damages.
Today, Morin struggles with his eyesight. He suffers from "dry eyes." The dry eyes make his eyes feel like he's in a hot, dusty, desert wind. He relies mostly on his right eye for vision as his left eye produces what he describes as "a dozen double images." In artificial light, Morin says he sees about 40 percent of what he could see prior to his surgery.
McHugh v. Smith and Wayside Inn
Jul 31, 2001
Plaintiff Verdict for $822,000
McHugh was running along a familiar loop of highway when a car plowed into him. He didn't see anything. In fact, he had no memory of the car hitting him. Everything he or anyone knew about the incident came from the woman who had been driving the car. Her story was that the jogger had been going down the middle of the road, with his back to the car.
â€œGreg believed in me,â€ recalls Pete McHugh. â€œHe could see I was being truthful.â€
For McHugh, a retired high school principal, his attorneyâ€™s belief in him was important. Because other than his wife, Greg Zeuthen was about the only one who had faith in McHughâ€™s version of how things must of transpired on October 7, 1999.
On that day, McHugh was running along a familiar loop of highway when a car plowed into him. He didn't see anything. In fact, he had no memory of the car hitting him. Everything he or anyone knew about the incident came from the woman who had been driving the car. Her story was that the jogger had been going down the middle of the road, with his back to the car. She said that when she tried to pass him, he darted in front of her; she couldn't avoid hitting him.
For McHugh, the story didn't wash. Things were fuzzy â€“ he had suffered a brain concussion and a skull fracture as a result of the collision â€“ but he knew himself well enough to know something was amiss. He had been running this same loop fairly regularly for 20 years. He always ran on the left side of the road, facing the oncoming traffic. McHugh knew in his heart the collision was not his fault.
He heard about Greg Zeuthen from a neighbor and asked Zeuthen to represent him. â€œFrom the start, Greg picked up the ball and ran with it.â€
On July 31, 2001, the case went to trial. Zeuthen was able to convince the jury the driver was not telling the truth. At the close of the three day trial, jurors awarded McHugh $822,000 in compensation.
McHugh remains impressed, â€œWhat I appreciated most about Greg was his genuine concern. He did a great job of staying in communication with me. He was never too busy too meet with me and take my calls. That in itself meant a lot.â€