Here is a link to the reported appeals decision in my case.

These are difficult cases, trying for all involved. Press attention can help but can also add to the emotional impact on the parties.

The highly anticipated trial in Sarasota will center on the role of Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in the separation of then-10-year-old Maya from her mother, Beata Kowalski, who, after nearly 90 days of being unable to see her daughter because of suspicions that she was making Maya’s condition worse, took her own life in January 2017. The Netflix documentary was released in June.

“Our trial strategy is simple,” the Kowalskis’ attorney Greg Anderson told Law360. “If the truth comes in and I am able to put my case in, I feel very confident that a jury will agree that Maya Kowalski was abused and that Johns Hopkins made an intentional decision to try to force the Kowalskis to agree with their misdiagnosis.”

But the hospital is expected to present evidence at trial that Maya, who arrived at the St. Petersburg hospital on Oct. 7, 2016, significantly underweight and in a wheelchair, did well under the hospital’s care and is living a normal life today. Johns Hopkins maintains that its doctors did their duty as mandatory reporters to report their suspicions of medical abuse to the Florida Department of Children and Families, and it was that agency and a judge who did the investigation and decided to temporarily remove Maya from her parents’ custody.

These thoughts from the Plaintiff’s lawyer ring true based upon my experience.

Anderson, the Kowalskis’ attorney, said he is confident about the facts and the law as it stands applied to the facts, although he says he is concerned about certain pretrial orders excluding evidence that could “cut down the case to something that has no resemblance to what actually happened.”

“If we’re allowed to get the facts in, if the jury’s allowed to hear what actually happened to these folks, I feel very confident,” he said.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1721301?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2023-09-14&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=3?copied=1

The post A Difficult Case appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

The Georgia Department of Transportation cannot fully escape a lawsuit alleging that it is responsible for a passenger killed at a highway’s intersection, a state appeals court has ruled, saying the government is not entitled to sovereign immunity on claims its road inspections were negligent.

A three-judge panel said Tuesday that the parents of Ashleigh Munro, who died in a November 2017 crash, can’t bring claims that the intersection that allegedly caused the incident was negligently designed. But the appeals court allowed them to pursue claims that the transportation department had a duty to maintain and inspect the intersection, saying the question is separate from that of engineering design.

“We agree with the Munros that this claim involves the inspection and maintenance of the subject intersection and not its engineering design,” the panel said. “So we also agree with the Munros that immunity is waived to the extent that the DOT’s role included inspection of the state roadway and intersection itself to detect hazards or to determine compliance with laws, regulations, codes, or ordinances.”

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1693280?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2023-06-28&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=19?copied=1

The post Does Sovereign Immunity Apply to Your Claim? appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.