A jury in Paterson began its deliberations Tuesday in the case of a Bloomingdale woman who claims a Paramus plastic surgeon’s negligence in performing cosmetic surgery has left her unable to close her eyes or blink.
The panel will resume work Wednesday in deciding whether Dr. Paul Parker should pay monetary damages to patient Marilyn Leisz, who says she can no longer do things like play tennis or racket ball, watch TV or work at the computer for long periods, drive in congested areas or even sleep with her eyes fully closed.
Dr. Parker has said he and his staff fully informed Leisz of all the possible risks of a blepharoplasty, in which skin is removed from the eyelid to correct drooping (known as ptosis). The doctor has insisted that among the things Leisz was warned of was possible incomplete eyelid closure and dryness. He also maintains he did not deviate from accepted standards of care in performing the procedure.
Leisz testified during the trial that as a result of the condition, she has endured years of painful procedures by another doctor to try to mitigate the alleged damage done by Dr. Parker. She said she must also stick to an exhausting daily regimen of drops and steroidal jellies to keep her eyes from being damaged and to provide comfort when she sleeps.
Blinking is what keeps the cornea moist, attorneys explained during the trial. Without blinking, the cornea can be damaged by excessive dryness. Drops and creams she has taken since Parker’s surgery to keep the eyes moist can actually create the sensation of “driving in a rainstorm without windshield wipers,” Leisz testified. The average person blinks about seven times a minute, according to Leisz attorney, Roy Konray of Rahway.
Leisz has undergone three blepharoplasties – one in 2004 and another in 2005 by other physicians before she then went to Parker for that procedure and a face lift. Leisz, through her attorney, has alleged to jurors that so much skin had already been removed from the eyelids that Parker should have known never to perform another blepharoplasty on Leisz. She also alleges that she was never informed by Parker of all the possible risks of the procedure, including incomplete eyelid closure.
Dr. Parker insists a brochure specifically spelling out incomplete eyelid closure as a risk was given to Leisz, as it is to all patients who undergo the procedure. He also maintains he talked to her about that risk verbally. Leisz testified that the only risk Parker warned her of was bruising, swelling and discomfort. In his summation to jurors seated before state Superior Court Judge Ralph L. DeLuccia Jr. Tuesday, Hugh Francis, of Morristown, Parker’s lawyer, said it seemed unlikely a woman so experienced in undergoing plastic surgery on her eyes would have accepted such an answer or known of the other risks. “She had had two ptosis surgeries,” Francis said. “None of those other doctors ever mentioned that?”
Leisz’s claim that she was given a brochure but that it did not warn of possible incomplete eyelid closure is not credible, and that odds are she simply did not read it, Francis said. “What reasonable patient who had multiple cosmetic surgery would not take the time to read a brochure about the nature of the procedure and the risks inherent to it?” Francis said. “It’s clearly reasonable to ask a patient to do that.”
Konray, in his summation to the jury, said the doctor should have known better than to do the surgery at all based on pictures and a physical examination of eyelids that were already tightened to the limit. “No – no -- no. That’s what Dr. Parker should have said on the topic of more eye surgery,” Konray said.
The jury will resume its deliberations Wednesday.
E-mail: petrick@northjersey.com
A jury in Paterson began its deliberations Tuesday in the case of a Bloomingdale woman who claims a Paramus plastic surgeon’s negligence in performing cosmetic surgery has left her unable to close her eyes or blink.
The panel will resume work Wednesday in deciding whether Dr. Paul Parker should pay monetary damages to patient Marilyn Leisz, who says she can no longer do things like play tennis or racket ball, watch TV or work at the computer for long periods, drive in congested areas or even sleep with her eyes fully closed.
Dr. Parker has said he and his staff fully informed Leisz of all the possible risks of a blepharoplasty, in which skin is removed from the eyelid to correct drooping (known as ptosis). The doctor has insisted that among the things Leisz was warned of was possible incomplete eyelid closure and dryness. He also maintains he did not deviate from accepted standards of care in performing the procedure.
Leisz testified during the trial that as a result of the condition, she has endured years of painful procedures by another doctor to try to mitigate the alleged damage done by Dr. Parker. She said she must also stick to an exhausting daily regimen of drops and steroidal jellies to keep her eyes from being damaged and to provide comfort when she sleeps.
Blinking is what keeps the cornea moist, attorneys explained during the trial. Without blinking, the cornea can be damaged by excessive dryness. Drops and creams she has taken since Parker’s surgery to keep the eyes moist can actually create the sensation of “driving in a rainstorm without windshield wipers,” Leisz testified. The average person blinks about seven times a minute, according to Leisz attorney, Roy Konray of Rahway.
Leisz has undergone three blepharoplasties – one in 2004 and another in 2005 by other physicians before she then went to Parker for that procedure and a face lift. Leisz, through her attorney, has alleged to jurors that so much skin had already been removed from the eyelids that Parker should have known never to perform another blepharoplasty on Leisz. She also alleges that she was never informed by Parker of all the possible risks of the procedure, including incomplete eyelid closure.
Dr. Parker insists a brochure specifically spelling out incomplete eyelid closure as a risk was given to Leisz, as it is to all patients who undergo the procedure. He also maintains he talked to her about that risk verbally. Leisz testified that the only risk Parker warned her of was bruising, swelling and discomfort. In his summation to jurors seated before state Superior Court Judge Ralph L. DeLuccia Jr. Tuesday, Hugh Francis, of Morristown, Parker’s lawyer, said it seemed unlikely a woman so experienced in undergoing plastic surgery on her eyes would have accepted such an answer or known of the other risks. “She had had two ptosis surgeries,” Francis said. “None of those other doctors ever mentioned that?”
Leisz’s claim that she was given a brochure but that it did not warn of possible incomplete eyelid closure is not credible, and that odds are she simply did not read it, Francis said. “What reasonable patient who had multiple cosmetic surgery would not take the time to read a brochure about the nature of the procedure and the risks inherent to it?” Francis said. “It’s clearly reasonable to ask a patient to do that.”
Konray, in his summation to the jury, said the doctor should have known better than to do the surgery at all based on pictures and a physical examination of eyelids that were already tightened to the limit. “No – no -- no. That’s what Dr. Parker should have said on the topic of more eye surgery,” Konray said.
The jury will resume its deliberations Wednesday.
E-mail: petrick@northjersey.com
No comments:
Post a Comment