South Carolina Civil Litigation Attorneys
Recent Results
January 2012
Molly Craig and Robert H. Hood, Jr., along with associate Brian E. Johnson, received a defense verdict on December 15, 2011 after a seven day wrongful death medical malpractice jury trial in the Circuit Court of South Carolina, Charleston County. The Estate brought suit for the death of a 51 year old mother of two who died after receiving gadolinium for an MRI with contrast dye. The decedent presented to a diagnostic radiology suite for an MRI with contrast for ongoing back pain. Shortly after receiving the contrast dye, the decedent had a reaction, resulting in a seizure. Following the seizure, the Defendant radiologist assessed and monitored the decedent while she was in a postictal state and arranged for transfer of the patient to the Emergency Department for further evaluation. During the transport to the hospital, the patient expired.
The Plaintiff's expert alleged the doctor failed to timely respond to the patient having a contrast reaction to the dye and failed to treat the patient for anaphylactic shock by not giving any medicine, both of which resulted in her death. The autopsy report listed the cause of death as anaphylaxis. The defense presented testimony that the decedent did not have the medical signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis and the doctor properly treated the patient for a seizure. Additionally, the defense disputed the cause of death in the autopsy report by proving the decedent had cocaine metabolites in her system which resulted in a drug toxicity and her death was ultimately caused by a cardiac arrhythmia and resulting cardiac arrest. The jury returned a verdict for the defense after deliberating for two hours and fifteen minutes.
James B. Hood and H. Cooper Wilson, III of the Hood Law Firm, LLC obtained a defense verdict on December 7, 2011 in the Court of Common Pleas, State of South Carolina, Richland County before the Honorable James R. Barber, III. The Plaintiff filed a medical malpractice case against the Defendant physician and his practice alleging that he breached the standard of care while providing care to her in the Spring of 2007. Specifically, the Plaintiff suffered a broken left leg for which the Defendant applied a long leg cast. Several weeks post-operatively, the Plaintiff developed an infection in her leg which she attributed to the doctor’s negligence for either improperly casting the leg or for failing to discover the complication in a timely manner.
The Defendant presented evidence through medical records and witness testimony that he properly casted the leg and the post-operative care was reasonable and appropriate. Specifically, the Defendant offered evidence that the Plaintiff did not present with the clinical signs or symptoms of a complication following her surgery and thus the Defendant had no reason to suspect a complication. Finally, the Defendant presented evidence that the Plaintiff's condition changed following her final visit with the Defendant and those changes caused the Plaintiff’s infection.
The case was tried for three days and the jury returned a verdict for the Defendant.
November, 2011
Molly Craig and Chilton Simmons, along with associate Elizabeth Ballentine, obtained a defense verdict on November 15, 2011 in Charleston County, South Carolina before The Honorable Roger M. Young. The Plaintiff filed a medical malpractice action against an obstetrician and her practice in connection with the delivery of a baby who suffered from severe brain damage in 2004. The Plaintiff alleged the doctor was negligent by not expediting delivery of the baby by a caesarian section, thereby causing severe injury to the minor child’s brain, resulting in hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and severe permanent harm. The defense presented testimony that the baby was tolerating labor in utero as evidenced by the fetal monitor strip which was reassuring until just prior to delivery. Once the fetal monitor became non-reassuring, the baby was delivered within minutes. The Plaintiff alleged there were multiple signs of fetal distress throughout labor and the failure to intervene with a timely caesarean section resulted in a hypoxic injury to the baby’s brain. Further, the defense presented expert testimony that the cause of the child’s brain damage was caused by an infection in the placenta known as chorioamnionitis at least five days before labor and delivery. Prior to trial, the hospital settled the case. The case was tried for seven days and the jury returned a defense verdict in favor of the obstetrician and her practice.
Elloree A. Ganes and Happel Scurry of the Hood Law Firm, LLC obtained a defense verdict on November 17, 2011 in the United States District Court, District of South Carolina, Charleston Division before the Honorable Bristow Marchant. The Plaintiff filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 USC §1983 against a Corrections Officer alleging the use of excessive force. Specifically, the Plaintiff alleged that on June 19, 2009, when he asked to receive medical treatment for his inability to eat and uncontrollable vomiting, the officer opened his cell door and sprayed him in the face with pepper spray. Plaintiff alleged these actions violated his 8th and 14th Amendment rights.
The defense presented testimony that the Plaintiff was outside of his cell and failed to comply with direct orders to return to his cell. Further, the defense offered testimony that medical staff attended to the Plaintiff following the incident and that he was found to be in no acute distress or otherwise in need of medical attention.
The Plaintiff originally sought one million dollars and punitive damages. The case was tried for two days and the jury returned a defense verdict in favor of the officer after less than thirty minutes of deliberation.
The Hood Law Firm, LLC has a long history of obtaining success for our clients. We have included a list of successful verdicts and settlements for our clients to review, complete with notes about the cases, litigation techniques used and awards obtained.
We keep our clients informed about recent changes, events and awards bestowed upon the firm. We also post articles about important changes in state and federal law that may affect litigation practices and upcoming cases.
Firm News
Robert H. Hood and Molly Craig Recognized by Best Lawyers
October 2011
Robert H. Hood and Molly Craig as “Charleston, SC Lawyers of the Year”. Robert H. Hood has been named as the “Charleston, SC Best Lawyers Insurance Law Lawyer of the Year, and Charleston, SC Best Lawyers Medical Malpractice Law Lawyer of the Year” for 2012. Molly Craig was also named as the “Charleston, SC Best Lawyers Health Care Law Lawyer of the Year” for 2012.
After more than a quarter of a century in publication, Best Lawyers is designating “Lawyers of the Year” in high-profile legal specialties in large legal communities. Only a single lawyer in each specialty in each community is being honored as the “Lawyer of the Year.”
Best Lawyers compiles its lists of outstanding attorneys by conducting exhaustive peer-review surveys in which thousands of leading lawyers confidentially evaluate their professional peers. The current, 18th edition of The Best Lawyers in America (2012) is based on more than 3.9 million detailed evaluations of lawyers by other lawyers.
The lawyers being honored as “Lawyers of the Year” have received particularly high ratings in our surveys by earning a high level of respect among their peers for their abilities, professionalism, and integrity.
Bobby Hood of Hood Law Firm, LLC Honored in Chambers USA
May 2011
Chambers and Partners, a leading legal research directory, recognized Bobby Hood Sr. in its Chambers USA 2011 edition. Each edition identifies and ranks the world’s best lawyers by virtue of their technical expertise, business acumen, prompt delivery and provision of the best value for clients for their money.
Molly Craig Receives 2011 Gold Compleat Lawyer Award
April 2011
Molly Craig received the Gold Compleat Lawyer Award from the University of South Carolina School of Law Alumni Association. The Compleat Lawyer Award recognizes attorneys who have made significant contributions to the legal profession and exemplify the highest standard of professional competence, ethics and integrity. The Compleat Lawyer Award selection committee consists of the Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, the Chief Judge of the South Carolina Court of Appeals, the President of the South Carolina Bar, the President of the Law School Alumni Association Board and the Dean of the University of South Carolina School of Law.
Bobby Hood and Molly Craig named to South Carolina Super Lawyers
April 2011
Bobby Hood and Molly Craig were included in 2011 South Carolina Super Lawyers. Bobby Hood was included in the Medical Malpractice, Commercial Litigation, Civil Litigation and Business Litigation areas. Molly Craig was included in the Medical Malpractice, Civil Litigation and Estate and Trust Litigation areas. The nomination process included peer nomination, independent evaluation of candidates by an attorney-led research staff and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Only 5 percent of the lawyers in the state are named to the list.
Hood Law Firm Obtains Defense Verdict in Medical Malpractice Case
April 2011
Bobby Hood, Jr. and Jeffrey Bogdan obtained a defense verdict for a general surgeon and his practice in Greenville County, South Carolina. The Plaintiff filed a medical malpractice action against the surgeon who was treating a forty-five year old woman for gallbladder disease. After providing informed consent of the risks of the surgery to the Plaintiff, the physician performed an elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The Plaintiff alleged that the surgeon misidentified the anatomical landmarks thereby severing the common bile duct and the hepatic bile duct during the surgery. The severed ducts were discovered six days later and the patient was referred to the nearby medical university for the repair surgery. Her repair surgery was complicated by other conditions and she had over $300,000 in medical expenses. The Defendants were able to prove the injury was an unfortunate but a known complication of the procedure and not caused by a deviation from the standard of care. Further, the Defendants argued there was no evidence that the Plaintiff would incur any future medical expenses related to the incident or her life will be affected in any way. All evidence showed that the reparative surgery was successful. After a four day trial, the jury returned a verdict for the Defendants.
Hood Law Firm Obtains Dismissal for Multiple Clients in RICO Class Action Lawsuit
March 2011
Bobby Hood and Jamie Hood obtained a dismissal for numerous eye surgeons and some of their Clinical Directors who were previously or currently affiliated with TLC Lasik Centers and were named in a RICO class action lawsuit filed in Federal Court in South Carolina. The Plaintiffs allege that TLC Lasik Centers across the country are doing surgery on patients who had contraindications for the procedures and who were either not helped or harmed by the surgery. There were also allegations of fraud, HIPAA violations regarding patient privacy, civil conspiracy and racketeering. We were successful in winning the dismissal of all our clients prior to the start of any discovery.
Hood Law Firm Wins Another Medical Malpractice Defense Verdict
November 2010
Molly Craig, Jamie Hood, and Cooper Wilson, III obtained a defense verdict for an internist and her practice in Greenville County, South Carolina. The Plaintiff filed a medical malpractice action against an internist who was treating a forty-eight year old woman for multiple medical conditions and taking approximately twenty-five medicines as a result of those co-morbidities. The Plaintiff alleged that the numerous medications caused a polydrug overdose and the Decedent suffered respiratory insufficiency resulting in a cardiopulmonary arrest. The coroner, toxicologist, and the forensic pathologist involved in the case concluded the Decedent died as a result of respiratory insufficiency due to synergistic overdose. The Defendants, however, were able to prove the medications prescribed for the Decedent were reasonable and appropriate, given her complex medical problems and conditions particularly since she was taking the same drug regimen for several years without incident. The jury returned a verdict for the Defendants.
South Carolina Defense Trial Attorneys’ Association
November 2010
Molly Craig was elected President-Elect at the SCDTAA’s annual meeting. James Hood was elected to serve on the Executive Committee.
Bobby Hood and Molly Craig of Hood Law Firm, LLC Named in “Best Lawyers”
November 2010
Bobby Hood and Molly Craig were listed in the 2011 edition of Best Lawyers. Hood, who has been listed since Best Lawyers’ first edition in 1983, was included in the Commercial Litigation, Health Care Law, Personal Injury Litigation – Defense, Medical Malpractice – Defense, Product Liability and Insurance Law areas. Ms. Craig was included in the Health Care Law, ERISA Litigation and Medical Malpractice – Defense areas.
Medical Malpractice Defense Verdict for Hood Law Firm, LLC
August 2010
Bobby Hood, Molly Craig, Chilton Simmons and Elizabeth Ballentine of the Hood Law Firm, LLC obtained a defense verdict on August 11, 2010 in Charleston County, SC before the Honorable J. Michael Baxley. The plaintiff filed a medical malpractice against an obstetrician who delivered a baby with the assistance of a vacuum extractor device on July 16, 2002. The plaintiff alleged the doctor was negligent in his delivery of the baby by vacuum extraction, thereby causing injury to the child’s brain, resulting in brain bleeds in multiple areas and severe permanent harm.
The defense presented testimony that the baby was not tolerating labor in utero as evidenced by the drop in the baby’s heart rate on the fetal heart monitor. An emergent situation arose during the labor process where the baby needed to be delivered as quickly as possible to prevent hypoxia. Further, the defense presented expert testimony that the child’s brain bleeds and subsequent developmental, motor and cognitive delays and deficits were not caused by the use of the vacuum, but that the child was born with multiple congenital abnormalities including weak, malformed blood vessels in the brain.
The plaintiff presented a life care plan totaling $6.7 million and the plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury for $15 million. Prior to trial, the hospital and the nurse staffing agency settled the case. During trial, the doctor’s practice settled. The case was tried for two and a half weeks and the jury returned a defense verdict in favor of the obstetrician.
Chiropractor Medical Malpractice Defense Verdict for Hood Law Firm, LLC
June 2010
Molly Craig, Chilton Simmons, and Elizabeth Ballentine obtained a defense verdict on May 21, 2010 in Beaufort, SC before The Honorable Carmen Tevis Mullen. The plaintiff claimed medical malpractice against a Bluffton chiropractor and his practice. The plaintiff had a total of six treatments over the course of about nine days for complaints of back pain. The plaintiff alleged that one of the adjustments caused a disc herniation at T 8/9 which was confirmed on an MRI. The plaintiff later underwent surgery to correct the herniated disc.
The defense presented expert testimony that the plaintiff’s disc herniation was most likely caused by a pre-existing injury as opposed to the chiropractic adjustment to treat subluxations. Prior to trial, the defendants made no offer to settle the case. At trial, plaintiff presented alleged damages for the spinal surgery to correct the disc herniation as well as for future chronic back pain and permanent disability. The case was tried for a week and the jury returned a defense verdict after deliberating approximately two hours.
Molly Craig of Hood Law Firm, LLC Named National Coordinator of iCivics
May 2010
At the invitation of U.S. Supreme Court Justice (Ret.) Sandra Day O’Connor, Molly Craig of Hood Law Firm, LLC has been named a State Coordinator of Justice O’Connor’s iCivics project.
iCivics is a web-based education project designed to teach students civics and inspire them to be active participants in our democracy. iCivics is the vision of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who is concerned that students are not getting the information and tools they need for civic participation, and that civics teachers need better materials and support.
Dedicated and experienced state chairs and coordinators like Molly are working to bring iCivics to America’s classrooms. These volunteers play a critical role in advancing iCivics’ mission by creating state-specific strategies for the adoption of free and relevant curricular materials.
Information about iCivics can be found here.
Med Mal Defense Verdict for Hood Law Firm, LLC
April 2010
Bobby Hood, Bobby Hood Jr. and Elizabeth Ballentine obtained a defense verdict on April 27, 2010. The plaintiff claimed medical malpractice against several physicians who were consulted in to treat the plaintiff after his arrival at the emergency room on February 13, 2002.
The plaintiff was suffering from alcohol abuse, depression, confusion, seizure activity, and metabolic derangement, including acute hyponatremia and hypokalemia. The plaintiff’s extremely low sodium and potassium levels required correction but he then developed Central Pontine Myelinolysis (CPM) and deterioration in neurological function.
The plaintiff contended the defendants’ actions caused the plaintiff to develop CPM and rapid deterioration in neurological function and that the CPM resulted in his neurological deficits, paralysis, and respiratory failure. The defendants argued they were treating two potentially lethal presenting conditions, severely low sodium and potassium levels, that their care was appropriate and the development of CPM and neurological deficits were not the result of any alleged negligence by the defendants. The plaintiff presented a life care plan totaling $4.6 million. One of the defendants was dismissed on the first day of trial. The case was tried as to the remaining two physicians for a week and a day, and the jury returned a defense verdict after deliberating for less than an hour.
Medical Malpractice Settlement/Dismissal for Hood Law Firm. LLC
April 2010
A mistrial is better than a plaintiff verdict for “in excess of $10 million,” which was what the plaintiff’s attorney asked for in his opening and closing arguments. The case was tried in Hampton County on March 8, 2010 by Bobby Hood, Bobby Hood Jr. and Chilton Simmons.
The plaintiff claimed medical malpractice against a pediatrician who specializes in patients with behavioral and developmental problems. The physician gave the patient, who has a genetic abnormality, a neuroleptic medication called Abilify, and the plaintiff alleged that the Abilify caused the patient to incur a permanent movement disorder. Prior to trial, the defendants offered $350,000 to settle the case. The plaintiff’s demand was the coverage of $1 million.
The case was tried for a week and a half, and the jury deliberated for over 10 hours. When it became apparent that the jury would not reach a unanimous verdict, and after an Allen charge, an arrangement was reached whereby the defendants would pay $60,000 for each juror in favor of the plaintiff. The jury was polled via a unanimous ballot by the judge. Four of the jurors indicated on their ballots that they were in favor of the plaintiff. The case was settled and dismissed with prejudice based on a payment of $240,000 and will not be subject to recall for a new trial.
Hampton County has made the headlines nationally in the past as one of the most plaintiff-oriented venues in the United States and certainly in South Carolina. After the trial, several jurors stated that “Hampton County has changed” and that most of the discussion in the jury room related to the patient’s family needing to take responsibility instead of trying to blame the physician.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Obtains Summary Judgment for Shell Oil
April 2010
Jamie Hood obtained summary judgment for Shell Oil Company in a consumer commercial case alleging fraud and a violation of the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act. The plaintiff alleged that Shell Oil Company had engaged in fraudulent and unfair trade practices related to the rebate program known as the Shell Saver Card.
Part of the defense of this case relied upon the favorable opinion Bobby and Jamie Hood obtained in an appeal and reversal of a $27 million verdict where they represented Shell Oil Company and Texaco, Inc. in both the trial and the appeal of that case. (Jamison v. Morris, 385 S.C. 215, 684 S.E.2d 168 (2009); rehearing denied, Nov. 4, 2009). The Jamison case clarified the requirements for the imposition of vicarious liability under a theory of actual agency, which formed one of the bases for the dismissal of this commercial suit as well.
Bobby Hood and Molly Craig of Hood Law Firm, LLC Named in “Best Lawyers”
November 2009
Two of the Hood Law Firm, LLC’s partners were named among “The Best Lawyers in America“ in the organization’s 2009 publication. Bobby Hood Sr. was recognized in the practice areas of commercial litigation, health care law and personal injury litigation. Molly Craig was recognized in the health care law practice area.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Wins Appeal for Texaco
September 2009
Bobby Hood Sr., along with Jamie Hood of the Hood Law Firm, recently won an appeal for Texaco in a case closely followed by franchisors throughout the United States and the business community in South Carolina. The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed a jury verdict in favor of a passenger catastrophically injured and rendered a quadriplegic in a single car accident and held that Texaco, Inc. was entitled to a directed verdict on the issue of actual agency. The jury awarded the plaintiff $30 million, which the trial court reduced to $27 million based upon the jury’s assessment of 10% comparative fault by the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged that the accident was a result of the driver becoming intoxicated from alcohol illegally sold to him at a Texaco branded service station.
Throughout the pretrial, trial, post-trial and appellate stages of the case, Texaco maintained that it was not vicariously liable for the conduct of the independently owned and operated store. The plaintiff asserted that the branding requirements, the enrollment in a mystery shopper program and the brandishing of the Texaco emblem and customer service telephone number evidenced a degree of control beyond that of an ordinary franchisor/franchisee relationship.
In a unanimous decision, the South Carolina Supreme Court concluded that there was no evidence to support a conclusion that Texaco had the right or power to control the store in the performance of its retail alcoholic beverage sales or in the manner in which that work was done and held that Texaco was entitled to a directed verdict.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Wins Defense Verdict in Wrongful Death Lawsuit
July 2009
Molly Craig and Jamie Hood won a defense verdict in a wrongful death case for a nephrologist who during the placement of an internal jugular catheter, punctured the subclavian artery, resulting in loss of over five liters of blood, subsequent surgeries and a prolonged and complicated ICU course. Ultimately, the patient died.
The defense argued that the physician encountered a known, albeit extremely rare, complication of placing an internal jugular catheter. Much of the trial focused on the distinction between medical complications and medical negligence. After a one-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Wins Medical Malpractice Case
April 2009
The team at the Hood Law Firm, LLC of Charleston, SC has continued their success with another big defense verdict. On April 24, 2009, the trial team of Jamie Hood and John Weedon obtained a defense verdict for a colorectal surgeon and his practice. Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants performed a low anterior resection as opposed to a sigmoid colectomy which was the procedure that was called for as treatment for diverticulitis. Patient developed a pelvic abscess 15 days post-operatively and alleged that the defendants failed to recognize signs of infection during the immediate 24-hour period following the procedure. Infection caused the abscess, which ultimately led to severe pelvic floor dysfunction. The defendants established through objective medical evidence as well as expert testimony that a sigmoid colectomy was performed rather than a low anterior resection and that it was performed according to the standard of care. The defendants’ also proved that the patient exhibited no signs of infection at any point during the patient’s immediate post-operative course.
The defendants made no settlement offers to the plaintiff and after a one week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.
Verdict for Hood Law Firm, LLC in Negligent Supervision Case
April 2009
Hood Law Firm, LLC has continued its success with another excellent verdict. On April 22, 2009, the trial team of Chilton Grace Simmons and Elizabeth Ballentine obtained a $0 verdict for their client, Hilton Head Plantation Property Owners Association.
Plaintiff Robert Hutka and co-defendant Michelle Tinti lived together and the plaintiff alleged they were engaged to be married. The plaintiff paid for the installation of a pool at Ms. Tinti’s house on Hilton Head Island, with the alleged understanding she would reimburse him if they broke up. Ms. Tinti began a relationship with a security guard employed by Hilton Head Plantation Property Owners Association, and the plaintiff moved out of her house. Ms. Tinti subsequently filed domestic violence charges against the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged the charges were instigated by the new boyfriend (co-defendant Security Guard Don Lagomarsino). The plaintiff sued co-defendant Michelle Tinti for breach of contract for the cost of the pool ($35,000). He also sued co-defendants Michelle Tinti and Security Guard Don Lagomarsino for breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process. The plaintiff sued co-defendant Hilton Head Plantation Property Owners Association for negligent supervision and respondeat superior.
Judge Early struck the plaintiff’s causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty and malicious prosecution as to the co-defendants Tinti and Lagomarsino. After the three day trial, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $0 as to Hood Law Firm’s client, the Property Owners Association, on both counts. The jury found for the plaintiff against co-defendants Tinti and Lagomarsino for $3,136 on the charge of civil conspiracy, and for the co-defendants on the charge of abuse of process. Judge Early decided the quantum meruit cause of action for the cost of the pool ($35,000) as it was a legal question instead of a jury question, and ruled in favor of co-defendant Michelle Tinti on that count.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Takes Defense Verdict in In-Store Accident Case
December 2008
The Hood Law Firm, LLC continued its success earlier this month when Molly Craig, Chilton Simmons and Tyson Nettles took a defense verdict for a large home improvement chain in an in-store serious personal injury case.
While shopping for doors in one of the defendant’s stores, plaintiff began inspecting doors lying on a display rack. In the process, plaintiff pushed several doors up on their edge, and then stepped into the display without securing the doors he had pushed up. A door weighing approximately sixty pounds fell on him. Plaintiff thereafter underwent two spinal surgeries.
Initially filed in state court, Home Depot removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina in early July 2006. After a little more than two years of litigation in the federal court, including substantial discovery and motion practice, the case was tried to a jury before Hon. C. Weston Houck.
At trial, the plaintiff presented evidence of substantial injuries to his spine and lower back and his herniated discs diagnosis. The plaintiff has not worked since the accident five and a half years ago and is not expected to work in the future, including for the reason that he is now addicted to pain-killing drugs.
The plaintiff’s trial exhibit list reflects the plaintiff’s focus on damages (no exhibits concerning liability were evident in the docket; plaintiff’s list of trial exhibits included 39 medical records exhibits, employment information, the store’s incident report, a vocational evaluation, two x-rays and economic loss charts, but nothing other than the defendant’s own incident report concerning the liability issue).
Nevertheless, in view of the serious injuries sustained, including the plaintiff’s addiction to pain-killer drugs, defendant made a substantial settlement offer but it was rejected prior to trial. After a one week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict. The plaintiff failed to prove liability, including that the display rack design was unreasonable. The Hood Law Firm, LLC’s costs were also awarded in the Court’s take nothing decision.
Bobby Hood and Molly Craig of Hood Law Firm, LLC Named in “Best Lawyers”
November 2008
Two of the Hood Law Firm, LLC’s partners were named among “The Best Lawyers in America“ in the organization’s 2008 publication. Bobby Hood Sr. was recognized in the practice areas of commercial litigation, health care law and personal injury litigation. Molly Craig was recognized in the health care law practice area.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Wins Defense Verdict for OB/GYN
October 2008
On October 23, 2008, the Hood Law Firm, LLC trial team of Bobby Hood, Jamie Hood and Diedra Wilson Hightower obtained a defense verdict for a local Ob/Gyn and his practice in Richland County, SC. The plaintiff was a pre-natal patient of the Ob/Gyn practice during 2002 and was admitted to the co-defendant hospital on March 7, 2003 due to leaking amniotic fluid where labor was induced. The defendant doctor discussed a possible C-section, but plaintiff alleged that he did not discuss the risks of overstimulation of the uterus. Pitocin was continued and the plaintiff alleged the fetal monitoring strips were non-reassuring, but the nursing staff did not notify the doctor. The doctor recalled reviewing the strips at 11:20 p.m. at which time they were normal. The strips showed an abnormality (uterus ruptured) shortly after midnight and the doctor arrived several minutes after being called by the nurses. The baby was delivered via C-section within twenty minutes and a hysterectomy was not required. The plaintiffs asserted through their expert testimony that the doctor was negligent in delaying the decision to perform a C-section and delaying the performance of the C-section. Further, the plaintiffs alleged the nurses at the hospital failed to timely notify the doctor of the plaintiff’s changed condition, which resulted in a delayed delivery causing brain damage. The cause of the baby’s developmental delays was disputed. The defendants made no settlement offers to the plaintiff and after a two-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Obtains Defense Verdict in Products Liability Trial
September 2008
The team at the Hood Law Firm, LLC continued their success with another big defense verdict. On September 18, 2008, the trial team of Bobby Hood, Bobby Hood Jr. and Jamie Hood, along with their local counsel Marianne J. Gilmartin, obtained a defense verdict in an electrocution case for a seller of aerial lift trucks. The case was tried before the Honorable Robert A. Mazzoni in Scranton, Lackawanna County, PA. The Plaintiff was represented by Melissa A. Scartelli of the Scartelli law firm of Scranton, PA.
The plaintiff was a 39-year-old tree trimmer employed by Asplundh Tree Service, Inc. On April 18, 2002, the plaintiff was operating an aerial lift and trimming tree branches from electric lines along a rural highway. Mr. Hartman sustained life-threatening injuries when he came in contact with the electric lines, and he claimed that the aerial lift in which he was operating suddenly, without warning, made an unexpected move propelling him into contact with the wires. The plaintiff put up testimony of damages in excess of $15 million related to the repeated electrical injuries sustained as the plaintiff completed the electrical circuit numerous times. The team was able to prove that the aerial lift did not cause the electrical contact and that the electrical contact was a result of operator error.
The defendant made no settlement offers to the plaintiff, and after a two-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.
Another Defense Verdict for the Hood Law Firm, LLC
September 2008
The trial team of Molly Craig, Jamie Hood and Elizabeth Ballentine of the Hood Law Firm, LLC obtained a defense verdict for a local colorectal surgeon and his practice. The case was tried before the Honorable Larry Patterson in Greenville County, SC. The plaintiff was represented by the law firm of Parham, Smith & Dodson, LLC of Greenville, SC.
The plaintiff underwent an overlapping sphincteroplasty for complaints of fecal incontinence. She underwent surgery in December 2006 and the operating physician wrote an order for the covering physician to remove the packing inserted at the surgical site. The defendant was the covering physician who changed the order for the nurse to remove the packing. The plaintiff was discharged with the packing still in place and the foreign body was removed by the operating physician six days after discharge from the hospital. The plaintiff alleged the foreign body caused an infection that resulted in a failed surgical procedure. The plaintiff alleged the failed repair resulted in complete incontinence to stool and flatus, and severe emotional problems. The plaintiff had a subsequent sphincteroplasty at the Cleveland Clinic which was deemed successful although she still experiences flatal incontinence on a daily basis and incontinence to stool once to twice a week.
The defendants made no settlement offers to the plaintiff and after a one-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.
Hood Law Firm, LLC Secures Defense Verdict for Psychiatric Hospital
March 2008
On March 21, 2008, the trial team of Molly Craig and Diedra Wilson Hightower of the Hood Law Firm, LLC obtained a defense verdict for a local psychiatric hopsital in a false imprisonment/assault/invasion of privacy/loss of consortium case involving an involuntary commitment to a psychiatric hospital for one night and the emotional damage suffered as a result.
On May 2, 2005, the plaintiffs reported to the wife’s treating psychiatrist that she self-discontinued her psychotropic medications, had not slept for days and had been experiencing suicidal ideation. They agreed that she needed to be admitted to a mental health facility for in-patient treatment and calls were made to the defendant to notify staff that the plaintiff had been experiencing suicidal ideation and would be arriving at the facility for in-patient treatment. She arrived, accompanied by her husband, and they were interviewed by a Mental Health Counselor, who was informed that she had been experiencing suicidal thoughts and appeared to be manic. She presented the plaintiff with “Consent For Treatment Forms,” and the plaintiff refused to execute the documents. A call was made to a treating psychiatrist to report this, and as a result, the patient was involuntarily committed. The psychiatrist examined her the following day and she was discharged.
The plaintiffs contended that the patient was not a candidate for involuntary admission, and that she was mentally stable and rational because she had the necessary thought process to seek help through a voluntary admission. Additionally, the plaintiffs contended that the defendant violated the statute governing involuntary commitments, specifically, South Carolina Code Annotated §§44-17-410, since she was committed without an in-person examination by a licensed physician prior to commitment. The plaintiff tried the case as a false imprisonment case while the defendant argued it was a medical negligence case. The Court allowed the jury to decide whether the statute had been violated.
