Craniosynostosis surgery was performed on the infant plaintiff to correct a congenital skull malformation, but was delayed until the child was 14 months of age. Third-party defendants' experts asserted that the surgery was cosmetic in nature, thus precluding damages proximately resulting from the delay. Plaintiff's experts countered that the delay in diagnosing and treating the craniosynostosis was what led to plaintiff's mental retardation. The contrasting opinions raise...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
