The Rules To Effectively Litigating Hard To Win LASIK Injury Cases!

"The Rules To Effectively Litigating

Hard To Win LASIK Injury Cases."

By Dean Andrew Kantis
Founder of www.LifeAfterLasik.com   

First, what is the statute of limitations, and why is this important for the patient to understand prior to having irreversible LASIK eye surgery that permanently thins out the patient's cornea, and can potentially create severe dry eye syndrome and other visual complications such as halos, glare, double vision, starburst, foreign body sensation, etc. 

"THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AND THE

TIME BOMB OF POST LASIK ECTASIA:" 

The statute of limitations refers to the period within which you must start a lawsuit. If you fail to act in timely fashion, a court will dismiss your lawsuit, no matter how strong your claim may have been. Consequently, victims can be left without any legal remedy. The statutes of limitations for medical malpractice vary from state to state in duration (and exceptions).

The main point that needs to be understood is that patients who had LASIK need to consider the fact that post-LASIK ectasia may not surface for years after surgery. In some instances, their right to sue may be over before they even knew they had a case. 

To learn more about LASIK, the time bomb of ectasia, and the statute of limitations consider: http://www.krounerlaw.com/the-statute-of-limitations-and-time-bomb-of-post-lasik-ectasia .

"HOW CAN  PATIENTS PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS IF THE SURGERY DOES NOT GO AS PLANNED AND WHAT LEGAL RECOURSE DO THEY HAVE?"  

Given the comprehensive nature of LASIK informed consent forms, the patient wonders how he can sue when this fine print regrettably applies to him. First, the consent form does not protect the doctor from his own negligence. For example, if the patient initially was not a good candidate for surgery, if the doctor was negligent in performing the surgery, or if the laser malfunctioned, the informed consent form will not protect the doctor.

So, when might the informed consent form matter? An article in Cornea reports that 20% of LASIK patients suffer varying degrees of dry eye after LASIK surgery.[1] More candid surgeons admit the true number is closer to 50%. As a general rule, the complication or side effect of dry eyes is not due to any error or mistake by the doctor. It is generally considered to be a known and accepted risk of the surgery. The doctor tells you this so that you are not surprised if it happens to you. Dry eyes generally are not a sign of malpractice.

However, failing to inform a patient about this common side effect would constitute a breach of the duty of informed consent. Informed consent is a process. It is not a piece of paper. The pre-printed informed consent form is prepared for the vast majority of refractive laser surgery patients. But if the patient is at higher risk because he has a pre-existing corneal condition or disease, such as keratoconus, has suspicion for ectasia, or has a thin cornea, the doctor has a duty to inform his patient that he is not a good candidate for a refractive surgery. To learn more about informed consent and eye surgery read:  http://www.krounerlaw.com/informed-consent .

IF YOU'D LIKE TO RECEIVE MORE INFORMATION ON LITIGATING A LASIK OR REFRACTIVE SURGERY CASE, PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING: 

Todd J. Krouner founded The Law Office of Todd J. Krouner in October 1994. For the past decade, he has worked on a diverse range of plaintiffs’ LASIK litigation matters. In July 2005, he obtained a verdict of $7.25 million, which is the largest verdict ever for a case involving LASIK medical malpractice, Schiffer v. Speaker, et al. In 2009, Mr. Krouner obtained the second largest LASIK verdict of $5.4 million, including a record $3 million for his client’s pain and suffering alone, in Devadas v. Niksarli.

To date, nationwide, Mr. Krouner has successfully tried or settled nearly two dozen LASIK, or related eye, medical malpractice cases. At www.krounerlaw.com , he has a LASIK blog that offers some great tips and advice for potential patients or persons who have been injured as a result of eye surgery:

http://www.krounerlaw.com/lasik-blog .

Mr. Krouner was also the only attorney who spoke on behalf of injured LASIK patients at the April 25, 2008 emergency LASIK Ophthalmic FDA panel discussion held in Gaithersburg, Maryland.  He also alleged that the LASIK industry is known for "underreporting dissatisfied/permanent injury outcomes."

Yet the physician and LASIK mills continue to say "the patient was a success and made better," even though the patient completely disagreed. Lastly, Mr. Krouner encouraged the FDA to police and inspect LASIK factories to make sure they were following FDA laws and following mandatory MDR physician reporting of all "adverse outcomes” so that the FDA is aware of all LASIK injured patient cases.  If you had a poor refractive surgical outcome and would like to know more about litigating against your eye doctor or the laser manufacturer, then I recommend that you reach out to Todd Krouner and ask him to evaluate your case to see if there is the potential to recover for your pain and suffering, loss of income and medical expenses due to your loss of vision.

Law Office of Todd J. Krouner

93 North Greeley Avenue
Chappaqua, New York 10514
Telephone: (914) 238-5800

Email: info@krounerlaw.com  

Website: www.krounerlaw.com  

---

[1] Bailey M.D., Zadnik K., Outcomes of LASIK for myopia with FDA-approved lasers, Cornea, 2007, Apr.; 26(3):246-54.