Shariff Floyd Suing James Andrews

[aristocrat]

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25190084/ex-nfl-player-sharrif-floyd-sue-dr-james-andrews-others-180-million

 

Sharrif Floyd, a former defensive tackle for the Minnesota Vikings, is expected to file a $180 million lawsuit in a Florida court on Tuesday against Dr. James Andrews, the Andrews Institute for Orthopedic Surgery and others, said Floyd's lawyer, Brad Sohn.

A source told ESPN's Dan Graziano that, according to the expected lawsuit, Floyd in September 2016 went to the Andrews Institute for what he was told would be a routine arthroscopic surgery. He would require three to four weeks of recovery.

But once doctors began the process to operate, they determined Floyd needed microfracture surgery. That required them to drill into the bone, which caused bleeding and required him to receive a post-operation pain blocker. The suit alleges that those administering that pain blocker affected the procedure, paralyzing a nerve and the surrounding muscle and creating a situation from which he could not recover sufficiently to play football.

[dollars 2 donuts]

Wow...wow.

[Sig1Hunter]

Sooo.... what you are saying is....

 

Shariff dont like it?

[H2o]

2 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Sooo.... what you are saying is....

 

Shariff dont like it?

Rob the cash vault, rob the cash vault

[NoHuddleKelly12]

Ughh. Sounds bad all around for everyone involved 

[Mr. WEO]

Good luck with that, bro...

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

Good luck.  Sounds like his injury was a recognized complication, not medical malpractice.  In any event, Andrews is clearly not the target of the lawsuit, and he, more than the co-defendants, will certainly not be found liable.  Real garbage move naming doctors in lawsuits without any liability, especially those with that much notoriety. 

[Troll Toll]

He already couldn’t play football. His injury kept him from playing football, he’s not entitled to a perfect fix. It sucks, but people blow my mind with their sense of entitlement. If the doctors could choose a perfect outcome they would do it every time. That’s like if his team sued him for having a bad game.

[BringBackOrton]

8 minutes ago, Troll Toll said:

He already couldn’t play football. His injury kept him from playing football, he’s not entitled to a perfect fix. It sucks, but people blow my mind with their sense of entitlement. If the doctors could choose a perfect outcome they would do it every time. That’s like if his team sued him for having a bad game.

Has nothing to do with entitlement. Has everything to do with the cash.

[aristocrat]

33 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

Good luck.  Sounds like his injury was a recognized complication, not medical malpractice.  In any event, Andrews is clearly not the target of the lawsuit, and he, more than the co-defendants, will certainly not be found liable.  Real garbage move naming doctors in lawsuits without any liability, especially those with that much notoriety. 

 

depends if it was a mistake with the medicine post surgery that killed the nerve. if that's the case the docs are screwed.  the docs have insurance for this.  

[BringBackOrton]

37 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

depends if it was a mistake with the medicine post surgery that killed the nerve. if that's the case the docs are screwed.  the docs have insurance for this.  

It won’t be.

[aristocrat]

12 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

It won’t be.

wont be what?

[Mr. WEO]

51 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

depends if it was a mistake with the medicine post surgery that killed the nerve. if that's the case the docs are screwed.  the docs have insurance for this.  

 

 

You're joking right?  You did read they want 180 million.

 

This guy was never going to make anything close to that money anyway.  He was a decent player for a brief stretches. As his own GM put it: "When he is healthy, he's a pretty good player,"

 

He will have to prove that his care was negligible in that it fell outside the standard of care.  Bad outcome doesn't mean bad care.

[aristocrat]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

You're joking right?  You did read they want 180 million.

 

This guy was never going to make anything close to that money anyway.  He was a decent player for a brief stretches. As his own GM put it: "When he is healthy, he's a pretty good player,"

 

He will have to prove that his care was negligible in that it fell outside the standard of care.  Bad outcome doesn't mean bad care.

 

i'm not saying he will get 180 million. James Andrews just built like a 100 million dollar facility so he's got some coin. 

[Mr. WEO]

20 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

i'm not saying he will get 180 million. James Andrews just built like a 100 million dollar facility so he's got some coin. 

 

No surgeon has that kind of "coin".  This guy is hoping to shake down all of them for a fraction of that in a settlement.  It's unlikely any of the defendants will settle.

[Mrbojanglezs]

I'm sure he has a huge malpractice insurance policy anyway 

[Mr. WEO]

10 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:

I'm sure he has a huge malpractice insurance policy anyway 

 

No one carries anything close to that and insurers don't write policies for malpractice like that.

[mannc]

2 hours ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

Good luck.  Sounds like his injury was a recognized complication, not medical malpractice.  In any event, Andrews is clearly not the target of the lawsuit, and he, more than the co-defendants, will certainly not be found liable.  Real garbage move naming doctors in lawsuits without any liability, especially those with that much notoriety. 

Amazing that you were able to reach all those conclusions based on the linked article.  Are you an orthopedic surgeon?  A medical malpractice lawyer?  Or are you just really, really smart?

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

3 minutes ago, mannc said:

Amazing that you were able to reach all those conclusions based on the linked article.  Are you an orthopedic surgeon?  A medical malpractice lawyer?  Or are you just really, really smart?

 

That one. 

[mannc]

12 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No one carries anything close to that and insurers don't write policies for malpractice like that.

What do you know about the subject?  

1 minute ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

That one. 

Then you should know better than to spout opinions about the likely outcome of a medical malpractice case based on a newspaper article.

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, mannc said:

What do you know about the subject?  

Then you should know better than to spout opinions about the likely outcome of a medical malpractice case based on a newspaper article.

 

A lot.

 

You keep asking questions that, as you should have figured out already, have obvious answers.

 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

3 minutes ago, mannc said:

What do you know about the subject?  

Then you should know better than to spout opinions about the likely outcome of a medical malpractice case based on a newspaper article.

 

It seems counter-intuitive, and I can't fault you for thinking that, but I can tell you with 90% certainty I am right.  

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

A lot.

 

You keep asking questions that, as you should have figured out already, have obvious answers.

 

Ding Ding Ding.  

[mannc]

6 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

It seems counter-intuitive, and I can't fault you for thinking that, but I can tell you with 90% certainty I am right.  

Ding Ding Ding.  

I don’t believe you.

7 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

A lot.

 

You keep asking questions that, as you should have figured out already, have obvious answers.

 

Then you should know that he sued multiple defendants, including the anesthesiologists and the hospital, all of whom most likely carry very hefty liability policies. And your statement that “insurers don’t write policies for malpractice like that” makes no sense whatsoever.

[aristocrat]

32 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No one carries anything close to that and insurers don't write policies for malpractice like that.

 

the guy works on 100 million dollar athletes on a daily basis. he also just built a 100 million dollar facility for his own practice.  i'd say his policy is pretty hefty. now will floyd get 180? no. but he might end up with something in the 10's of millions. 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

5 minutes ago, mannc said:

I don’t believe you.

Then you should know that he sued multiple defendants, including the anesthesiologists and the hospital, all of whom most likely carry very hefty liability policies. And your statement that “insurers don’t write policies for malpractice like that” makes no sense whatsoever.

 

In New York, the average physician carries, at most, $2.3 million of coverage.  Now, Florida may be different, and Dr. Andrews may carry some hefty umbrella coverage, but I doubt it is to the tune of $160 million.  He would have to sue alot of doctors to get to that number.  

 

 

[mannc]

1 minute ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

In New York, the average physician carries, at most, $2.3 million of coverage.  Now, Florida may be different, and Dr. Andrews may carry some hefty umbrella coverage, but I doubt it is to the tune of $160 million.  He would have to sue alot of doctors to get to that number.  

 

 

He did.  He sued Andrews’s medical group, the hospital and a bunch of other professionals.  It’s possible that the damages prayed for exceed the amount of insurance coverage, but so what?  Those defendants are probably highly solvent and that just increases the pressure on the insurance companies to settle.

[jr1]

why do teams still send players there instead of having surgery locally?

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

3 minutes ago, mannc said:

He did.  He sued Andrews’s medical group, the hospital and a bunch of other professionals.  It’s possible that the damages prayed for exceed the amount of insurance coverage, but so what?  Those defendants are probably highly solvent and that just increases the pressure on the insurance companies to settle.

 

Yeah, but you aren't taking into the consent issue.  I would bet you anything that Dr. Andrews has a consent provision in his policy. 

[mannc]

6 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

Yeah, but you aren't taking into the consent issue.  I would bet you anything that Dr. Andrews has a consent provision in his policy. 

Probably, but so what?  That just gives him some control over the defense and settlement of the case.  If Andrews is facing potential liability for more than the amount of his policy, he might want to put pressure on his carrier to settle within policy limits, regardless of the consent clause or even the ultimate merits of the case.    

Edited November 6, 2018 by mannc

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, mannc said:

I don’t believe you.

Then you should know that he sued multiple defendants, including the anesthesiologists and the hospital, all of whom most likely carry very hefty liability policies. And your statement that “insurers don’t write policies for malpractice like that” makes no sense whatsoever.

 

Multiple defendants are always sued in med/mal cases. 

 

 As explained by  JAHBH below, unless he has some unusual extra coverage (maybe his business entity does), most policy writers don't go above $1,000,000/3,000,000 coverage.  The main reason is that, for a physician, less than 5% of cases pay out above coverage.

 

Andrews doesn't have his worth in a bank account or under the mattress waiting to be surrendered in a massive judgement against him.

 

Many plaintiffs sue for ridiculous amounts, but a physician doesn't need extra coverage for trumped up lost wages.

 

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

 

the guy works on 100 million dollar athletes on a daily basis. he also just built a 100 million dollar facility for his own practice.  i'd say his policy is pretty hefty. now will floyd get 180? no. but he might end up with something in the 10's of millions. 

 

See above.

 

As of March, the proposed "100 million dollar facility" had been denied it's Certificate of Need in Georgia.  I hasn't been built yet.  He's an investor, not the owner.

 

Regardless, his personal worth is probably well shielded.

Edited November 6, 2018 by Mr. WEO

[mannc]

14 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Multiple defendants are always sued in med/mal cases. 

 

 As explained by  JAHBH below, unless he has some unusual extra coverage (maybe his business entity does), most policy writers don't go above $1,000,000/3,000,000 coverage.  The main reason is that, for a physician, less than 5% of cases pay out above coverage.

 

Andrews doesn't have his worth in a bank account or under the mattress waiting to be surrendered in a massive judgement against him.

 

Many plaintiffs sue for ridiculous amounts, but a physician doesn't need extra coverage for trumped up lost wages.

 

 

See above.

 

As of March, the proposed "100 million dollar facility" had been denied it's Certificate of Need in Georgia.  I hasn't been built yet.  He's an investor, not the owner.

 

Regardless, his personal worth is probably well shielded.

I don’t know what Andrews owns or what his net worth is, but I’m guessing it’s very high.  

 

I’m not sure what your point is.   That Floyd could never recover $160 million from these defendants?  Obviously, it’s unlikely he would obtain a judgment of that size in the first place, but you can’t possibly know the likelihood of collection, especially given the presence of multiple insurance policies of unknown limits.  

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, mannc said:

I don’t know what Andrews owns or what his net worth is, but I’m guessing it’s very high.  

 

I’m not sure what your point is.   That Floyd could never recover $160 million from these defendants?  Obviously, it’s unlikely he would obtain a judgment of that size in the first place, but you can’t possibly know the likelihood of collection, especially given the presence of multiple insurance policies of unknown limits.  

 

He collects nothing if he can’t prove negligence.  Against James Andrews?  Again, good luck with that.  His case seems to be against the anesthesiologist’s nerve block anyway.  After deposition it’s possible Andrews could be let out. 

[mannc]

11 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

He collects nothing if he can’t prove negligence.  Against James Andrews?  Again, good luck with that.  His case seems to be against the anesthesiologist’s nerve block anyway.  After deposition it’s possible Andrews could be let out. 

You know absolutely nothing about the case, other than what you read in the article.  In particular, you know nothing about how strong (or weak) the case is against James Andrews.     

[Fadingpain]

5 hours ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Sooo.... what you are saying is....

 

Shariff dont like it?

Holy crap!

 

This is going to rock the Casbah!

 

 

5 hours ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Sooo.... what you are saying is....

 

Shariff dont like it?

Edited November 6, 2018 by Fadingpain

[Mr. WEO]

16 minutes ago, mannc said:

You know absolutely nothing about the case, other than what you read in the article.  In particular, you know nothing about how strong (or weak) the case is against James Andrews.     

 

Article says the postoperative nerve block caused nerve damage.  The block wasn’t done by Andrews.  

 

Mot really making a huge leap here....

[Mojo44]

 This can most definitely be a negligence malpractice case even with the patient’s consent. If the negative event that happened is not part of “customary and usual“ risks associated with the procedure the consent could be a non-issue. It doesn’t matter who actually did the nerve block if it was under the supervision and auspice is of Dr. Andrews. However all those involved can be sued. This includes the facility. If negligence can be shown and clearly resulted in and inability for the player to continue his career these are clearly “compensable damages“ that typically the court will see as a Measure with what somebody in his profession would make. Thus, a large award is not out of the question.  Malpractice cases are -based, fundamentally, on the following: 

 

 Negligent behavior has been established which results in compensable damages and the damages are considered “proximately caused“ by the negligent behavior. 

 

 By the way, I am a doctor, I do treat patients and my community, I am required to have malpractice/liability insurance. My particular specialty is very low risk, thankfully. I have never been sued. However, most doctors will know about these things. And, thus, my post. 

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, Mojo44 said:

 This can most definitely be a negligence malpractice case even with the patient’s consent. If the negative event that happened is not part of “customary and usual“ risks associated with the procedure the consent could be a non-issue. It doesn’t matter who actually did the nerve block if it was under the supervision and auspice is of Dr. Andrews. However all those involved can be sued. This includes the facility. If negligence can be shown and clearly resulted in and inability for the player to continue his career these are clearly “compensable damages“ that typically the court will see as a Measure with what somebody in his profession would make. Thus, a large award is not out of the question.  Malpractice cases are -based, fundamentally, on the following: 

 

 Negligent behavior has been established which results in compensable damages and the damages are considered “proximately caused“ by the negligent behavior. 

 

 By the way, I am a doctor, I do treat patients and my community, I am required to have malpractice/liability insurance. My particular specialty is very low risk, thankfully. I have never been sued. However, most doctors will know about these things. And, thus, my post. 

 

 

 

There would be no circumstance in his practice where the orthopedic surgeon would be considered a supervisor of an anesthesiologist doing a nerve block.  If the anesthesiologist can demonstrate that his indication, informed consented technique fall within the standard of care, then it would be impossible to prove negligence.  And if he/she is not found negligent, then there is no case against the facility/corporation where the procedure was done.

 

Patients are not awarded compensation simply for bad outcomes.  

 

"Everybody is named" so the plaintiff's attorney can depose everyone as part of discovery. 

 

 

[Mojo44]

3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

There would be no circumstance in his practice where the orthopedic surgeon would be considered a supervisor of an anesthesiologist doing a nerve block.  If the anesthesiologist can demonstrate that his indication, informed consented technique fall within the standard of care, then it would be impossible to prove negligence.  And if he/she is not found negligent, then there is no case against the facility/corporation where the procedure was done.

 

Patients are not awarded compensation simply for bad outcomes.  

 

"Everybody is named" so the plaintiff's attorney can depose everyone as part of discovery. 

 

 

When I mentioned customary and usual I am referring to the community standard of care. They are the same thing. We agree on that. However, if the anesthesiologist worked under Dr. Andrews in his facility he indeed could be considered negligent for utilizing that anesthesiologist. There are many fingers and they can go in many different directions. Trust me on this.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Mojo44 said:

When I mentioned customary and usual I am referring to the community standard of care. They are the same thing. We agree on that. However, if the anesthesiologist worked under Dr. Andrews in his facility he indeed could be considered negligent for utilizing that anesthesiologist. There are many fingers and they can go in many different directions. Trust me on this.

 

It's not Andrews's personal facility.  His anesthesia staff is likely a fee for service group, fully credentialed for that facility (like Andrews himself).   He can't, personally, be held responsible for them failing to meet the standard of care on a particular case--unless it is true and known by Andrews  that this particular anesthesiologist is well known to be so egregiously dangerous---and Andrews still allowed him access to his patient.  This is obviously absurd.

 

Also, I can guarantee you that any consent for nerve block will include the possibility of nerve damage.  It's a rare but well known complication.

 

Again, anesthesiologists do not "work under" surgeons.  Trust me on this.