Curran v. Kroll
Decision Date | 13 March 2012 |
Docket Number | No. 18585.,18585. |
Citation | 303 Conn. 845,37 A.3d 700 |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Parties | John A. CURRAN, III, Administrator (Estate of Leeann Curran), et al. v. Sherry L. KROLL et al. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Michael G. Rigg, with whom was Donna R. Zito, Hartford, for the appellants (named defendant et al.).
Kathleen L. Nastri, with whom was Cynthia C. Bott, Bridgeport, for the appellee (substitute plaintiff).
ROGERS, C.J., and NORCOTT, PALMER, ZARELLA, McLACHLAN and VERTEFEUILLE, Js.
The substitute plaintiff, Ryan P. Curran (plaintiff),1 the successor administrator of the estate of Leeann Curran (decedent), brought this medical malpractice action against the defendants, Sherry L. Kroll, a physician, and the Medical Center of Northeast Connecticut, LLP,2 claiming, inter alia, that Kroll had failed to warn the decedent adequately of certain risks associated with the use of birth control pills and the symptoms of those risks. The trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defendants and rendered judgment accordingly. The plaintiff then appealed to the Appellate Court, which reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the case for a new trial. Curran v. Kroll, 118 Conn.App. 401, 417, 984 A.2d 763 (2009). Thereafter, this court granted the defendants' petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the trial court's granting of a directed verdict in favor of the defendants?” Curran v. Kroll, 295 Conn. 915, 990 A.2d 866 (2010). We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court.
The opinion of the Appellate Court sets forth the following facts, construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and procedural history. 3 “The decedent died on June 8, 2002, as a result of blood clots in her lungs that likely originated in her left thigh, traveled through her venous system and her heart and lodged in her lungs. The official cause of her death was determined to be bilateral pulmonary emboli caused by deep vein thrombosis.4
Curran v. Kroll, supra, 118 Conn.App. at 403–406, 984 A.2d 763.
After the decedent's death, the plaintiff brought this action alleging, inter alia, that Kroll negligently had failed to warn the decedent of the signs and symptoms of deep vein thrombosis. “[At trial] Kroll testified that her training included information about the risks and side effects of birth control pills. She further testified that the risks of [Kroll] then acknowledged that ‘one of the risks associated with birth control pills can be blood clots,’ but she also stated that she did not know if that same risk was associated with Desogen because the studies citing an increased risk were based on the older formulations of birth control pills.
5 6
“The plaintiff's expert, Kenneth R. Ackerman, a board certified physician in internal medicine, testified that patients ‘put on birth control pills ... have a statistically increased risk of forming blood clots.’ He also stated that his opinion would not change on the basis of the name of the birth control pill, whether it was Desogen, Apri or some other formulation.... Ackerman also stated that ‘[a]n internist would expect that a reasonable patient, who has been advised properly, will recognize the appropriate side effects of the medication ... and receive medical attention ... should those symptoms or signs appear.’
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wood v. Rutherford
...operation, or surgery. See Torres v. Carrese , supra, 149 Conn. App. at 622, 90 A.3d 256.16 For example, in Curran v. Kroll , 303 Conn. 845, 859–60, 37 A.3d 700 (2012), the patient sought medical treatment for menopausal issues. Our Supreme Court held that the failure of the defendant physi......
-
In re Luis N.
... ... the evidence need only be reasonably susceptible of such an ... inference.' (Internal quotation marks omitted.) ... Curran v. Kroll , 303 Conn. 845, 857, 37 A.3d 700 ... (2012)." In re Shane M. , 318 Conn. 569, 595, ... 122 A.3d 1247, 1263-64 (2015) ... ...
-
Fajardo v. Boston Scientific Corporation
...(Internal quotation marks omitted.) Henriques v. Magnavice , 59 Conn. App. 333, 336, 757 A.2d 627 (2000) ; see also Curran v. Kroll , 303 Conn. 845, 857, 37 A.3d 700 (2012) ("it is well established that a plaintiff has the same right to submit a weak case as he has to submit a strong one" (......
-
Rossova v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC
...a motion for [judgment notwithstanding the verdict] is a question of law, over which our review is plenary."6 Curran v. Kroll , 303 Conn. 845, 855, 37 A.3d 700 (2012). "Two further fundamental points bear emphasis. First, the plaintiff in a civil matter is not required to prove [her] case b......