On July 14, 2009, the plaintiff, a 51-year-old cashier who had a history of clotting, presented to her primary care physician with severe, acute, abdominal tenderness and required morphine. Over a period of two weeks, her primary care physician and a gastroenterologist, who was with the same medical group, saw her on numerous occasions. Their working diagnosis was that the patient had peptic ulcer disease, or irritable bowel syndrome. During the same time period, the patient presented to an emergency room on four occasions, each time being discharged with severe abdominal pain of an unknown origin. On her fifth and last E.R. visit, she was admitted to the hospital and seen by a different physician, who immediately ordered a CT with contrast that showed a clot in the abdominal aorta extending into the superior mesenteric and celiac arteries. However, the patient claimed that even though the general and vascular surgeons were contacted STAT, her operation was delayed for 20 hours. The patient sued the two emergency physicians that treated her, their emergency room group, her treating gastroenterologist, the primary care medical group that she initially presented to, the hospital, and the hospital’s vascular and general surgeons who were allegedly contacted STAT. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that the delay in the patient’s diagnosis and surgery resulted in ischemic damage to multiple organs, resulting in the removal of those organs. Counsel also contended that based on the patient’s history of clotting and presentation with acute, severe abdominal pain, a work-up should have been done for an ischemic bowel and a CT scan with contrast should have been ordered. Additionally, plaintiff’s counsel contended that the general and vascular surgeons failed to timely operate on the patient. Defense counsel contended that the treating physicians, medical groups and hospital were unaware of the plaintiff’s history of clotting, and that her complaints were nonspecific. The E.R. defendants claimed that their role was to triage and stabilize the patient, and then refer her back to her primary care physicians for care. The surgeons contended that by the time of the referral, the ischemic damage was already done., The patient suffered ischemic damage to multiple organs, resulting in the need to remove portions of her liver, pancreas, the entirety of her spleen, and almost the entire small bowel. This resulted in her inability to eat food orally and extreme fatigue. The plaintiff was subsequently on total parenteral nutrition for three years until she received a transplant of the pancreas, liver and bowel in October 2012. The plaintiff remains at risk of rejecting the transplanted organs. As a result, she will require ongoing physician follow-up to monitor her condition. She will also require routine blood draws and CT scans of the abdomen.