Case details

Plastic surgeon claimed risk of scarring noted on consent form

SUMMARY

$0

Amount

Verdict-Defendant

Result type

Not present

Ruling
KEYWORDS
breathing problems., depression, disfigurement, emotional distress, face, mental, nose, psychological, rhinoplasty, scar
FACTS
On April 25, 2015, plaintiff Fifi Gewrgious, 36, a seamstress, underwent a rhinoplasty, which was performed by Dr. Alan Tran, a plastic surgeon. Gewrgious originally presented to Tran on March 21, 2014, for a consultation about a cosmetic adjustment to her nose and to address breathing problems. She then had multiple pre-operation visits with Tran before undergoing the rhinoplasty. However, when the surgical wound healed, Gewrgious was left with a scar on her nose. Gewrgious sued Tran, alleging that Tran failed to obtain her informed consent prior to performing the rhinoplasty and that Tran’s failure constituted medical malpractice. Specifically, Gewrgious contended that although she signed a consent form for the rhinoplasty, she would not have consented to the procedure if Tran had informed her of the risks scarring. Defense counsel noted that the consent form did mention scarring. In addition, Tran claimed that his care and treatment of Gewrgious was at all times appropriate and that he did obtain Gewrgious’ informed consent before performing the surgery. Thus, he claimed he was not negligent., Gewrgious claimed that noticed a wound on her nose immediately after the operation and that when it healed in around July 2014, she was left with a 1-centimeter scar to the dorsum of her nose. Gewrgious claimed that the scar made her embarrassed and that as a result, she did not want to continue working. She also claimed that she became depressed as a result of the injury and wears a skin-colored bandage on the area to cover the scar. Thus, Gewrgious sought recovery of $250,000 in non-economic damages and $5,000 in economic damages for her loss of earnings. Defense counsel contended that Gewrgious quit her job before the subject surgery because she intended to travel. Defense counsel acknowledged that Gewrgious never returned to work, but argued that Gewrgious never returned because she became pregnant and decided to become a stay-at-home mom. Thus, defense counsel argued that nothing Tran did caused or contributed to any injury alleged by Gewrgious.
COURT
Superior Court of Orange County, Santa Ana, CA

Recommended Experts

NEED HELP? TALK WITH AN EXPERT

Get a FREE consultation for your case