This year, VanOsdol became Ascension’s Executive Vice President and Chief Mission Integration Officer. Vincent’s never disclosed the existence of texts among them in court and that VanOsdol’s sworn statement “lacked candor and veracity.” Plaintiffs said VanOsdol responded he would put them in touch with their chief medical officer and it was important to investigate. Heekin, including patients they said would need above knee amputations. Vincent’s motion for protective order as to the deposition of Tom VanOsdolīut Judge Anderson found VanOsdol received at least one complaint from a local orthopedic surgeon about a number of concerning and potentially very poor outcomes for patients of Dr. READ: Affidavit of Tom VanOsdol | Order denying St. In an affidavit filed under oath last year, VanOsdol said he wasn’t involved in day to day operations, so he didn’t have unique, personal knowledge of issues involving Dr. Heekin committed hundreds of medical errors because he was affected by a progressive neurological condition that led to diminished motor skills and cognitive ability, as well as angry outbursts, impaired judgment, gait disturbances, and slurred speech. “No appeal can be taken to the Florida Supreme Court.”Īccording to Ascension’s website, VanOsdol was the top executive for Ascension’s Florida and Gulf Coast ministry from 2017 until this year. “That’s where the buck stops,” Fallgatter said. He said because of that decision, VanOsdol will have to testify in a deposition. “A per curiam decision means don’t agree with any of that…Judge Anderson was correct,” Fallgatter said. In an appeal filed last December, they argued lower court judge Bruce Anderson incorrectly ruled that former CEO Tom VanOsdol had “unique, personal knowledge” of the issues involved in the lawsuits.īut now, an appeals court denied their argument without giving an explanation.Īttorney Curtis Fallgatter, who is not affiliated with the case, explains what this kind “per curiam” response signifies. Vincent’s agrees to participate in arbitration proceedings to resolve some claims threatened against hospital, David HeekinĪ trial court judge previously ruled that Ascension did not meet their burden in showing the former CEO should be protected from being deposed, and now an appeals court has denied a request to review that ruling. Vincent’s knew doctor wasn’t fit to operate, but allowed him to perform surgeries | Legal filings show St. Vincent’s surgeon accused of botching procedures slurring speech, having outbursts | Lawsuits allege Ascension St. PREVIOUS STORIES: I-TEAM: New audio recordings added to lawsuits against doctor accused of botched surgeries | Deposition video shows former St. Vincent’s had been trying to protect the former CEO from being compelled to give deposition testimony under a Florida law known as the Apex Doctrine, which protects top government officials and corporate executives from “harassing and abusive” depositions sought for “no legitimate reason.” The suits allege he caused devastating injuries and even the death of one patient.Īscension St. David Heekin to operate on patients for years even as he was allegedly suffering a progressive neurological condition that caused him to lose his balance and slur his speech. Vincent’s must testify at a deposition as the health system defends hundreds of medical malpractice lawsuits focused on a former orthopedic surgeon at their Riverside hospital.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |