Quantcast

U.S. Navy veteran who allegedly suffered vision loss after surgery in VA hospital settles case

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Thursday, November 21, 2024

U.S. Navy veteran who allegedly suffered vision loss after surgery in VA hospital settles case

Federal Court
Patricialdodge

Dodge | Ballotpedia

PITTSBURGH – A U.S. Navy veteran who alleged that sub-standard care he received at his local Veterans Affairs hospital resulted in his suffering permanent vision loss and damage, is settling his claims with the federal government.

John Gazdacko of Pittsburgh first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on June 14, 2021 versus the United States America’s Department of Veterans Affairs, in Pittsburgh.

In 2017, the suit said that the plaintiff, a U.S. Navy veteran from 1961 to 1966, was treating at the Veteran’s Administration Hospital of Pittsburgh for multiple medical conditions including: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), chronic pain syndrome, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and gastro esophageal reflux disease,” the suit said.

“Plaintiff was diagnosed by VA physicians with Graves’ disease. Graves’ disease is an auto-immune disorder that affects the thyroid. It frequently results in and is the most common cause of hyperthyroidism. Signs and symptoms may include hyperthyroidism, cardiac rhythm dysfunction, gastrointestinal distress, weight loss, muscle weakness and mood swings.”

“Additionally, Graves’ disease frequently presents with, ocular and vision symptoms that may include inflammation of the eyes, swelling of the tissues and muscles around the eyes and bulging of the eyes with resultant diminution of visual activity called Graves’ ophthalmopathy or orbitopathy.”

The suit added that untreated and/or untimely-treated Graves’ ophthalmopathy or orbitopathy can lead to severe visual disturbance and dysfunction including diplopia, diminished visual acuity and blindness.

From 2017 to 2019, Gazdacko said he was examined a variety of physicians at the VA, who all allegedly noted his diagnosis of Graves’ disease, but initially did not receive further treatment for his eyes – with which he repeatedly mentioned worsening issues.

Unfortunately, plaintiff’s vision did not improve with medical treatment received later on and he was referred to Tonya Stefko, M.D., an ophthalmological surgeon at UPMC for a surgical consultation. On or about May 1, 2019, plaintiff underwent a bilateral orbit decompression by Dr. Stefko at UPMC. Concurrent with that procedure, plaintiff also underwent endoscopic medial orbital and optic canal decompressions performed by Carl Snyderman, M.D.

“Unfortunately, the surgical procedures did not restore plaintiff’s vision and he remains with severe vision loss bilaterally. This condition is likely permanent,” the suit stated.

“Had the attending medical providers at the VA of Pittsburgh timely diagnosed the plaintiff’s visual disturbance secondary to Graves’ disease, it is likely that appropriate and timely medical and/or surgical treatment would have been provided and plaintiff’s current severe vision loss could have been avoided.”

The VA filed an answer to the complaint on Aug. 1, admitting some of its tenets but largely denying Gazdacko’s claims and providing its own affirmative defenses.

“Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The alleged injuries and damages of plaintiff’s were not proximately caused by a negligent, careless or wrongful act or omission of the defendant United States. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2675(b), plaintiff is prohibited from seeking an amount over the amount asserted in an administrative claim,” the defenses stated.

“Plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial against the United States in an FTCA action. Plaintiff’s damages against the United States are limited to the damages recoverable under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Attorney’s fees are governed by the statute.”

UPDATE

After six months of mediation in the case, a federal judge explained in an April 13 order that a settlement is in the process of being finalized. Terms of the prospective settlement were not revealed.

“The Court has been advised that this action has been resolved, and the only remaining matters are the execution of a settlement document and compliance with the terms of the settlement agreement. It appears that there is no further action required by the Court at this time. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the Clerk mark this case administratively closed, but this order shall not be considered a dismissal or disposition of this case,” U.S. Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Dodge said.

“Should further proceedings herein become necessary, any party may file an appropriate pleading in the same manner as if this order had not been entered. Further, the Court expressly retains jurisdiction in this matter to consider any issue that may arise during the period when settlement is being finalized, including, but not limited to, enforcing settlement.”

For a count of negligence, the plaintiff is seeking damages in the sum of $2,000,000, plus pre-judgment interest, attorney’s fees and costs expended in this action and for such other relief as the Court deems necessary and just.

The plaintiff was represented by Michael C. George of the Law Office of Michael C. George, in Pittsburgh.

The defendant was represented by Michael C. Colville of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, also in Pittsburgh.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:21-cv-00776

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News