11202017Headline:

Legal Examiner Voices

Home

Email Mark Bello Mark Bello on LinkedIn Mark Bello on Twitter Mark Bello on Facebook Mark Bello on Avvo
Mark Bello
Mark Bello
Attorney • (877) 377-7848

"Black Box" Lasik Surgeon Sued Over 50 times

Comments Off

Medical malpractice is applicable in cases dealing with ophthalmologists; like this one involving an eye doctor who had been sued for med mal at least fifty times. He’d never faced discipline for any of those offenses.

This is quite the case when you get a chance to examine the details. Imagine an eye doctor who had been sued over 50 times for medical malpractice and not once during any of those cases was that doctor fined, censured or suspended.

The facts of this case are troubling and involve Lasik surgery; laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis. Evidently one (and there was evidence of more) patient of Dr. Nicholas Caro in Chicago, was badly injured during Lasik surgery; so badly harmed due to the negligence of the doctor, this patient had to get further treatment from another eye doctor and a cornea transplant.

The key to this case is that the doctor neglected to take the time to adequately assess and make an accurate diagnosis relating to the patient’s keratoconus; an eye condition that should have ruled him out for Lasik surgery. Keratoconus is a degenerative disorder where structural changes in the cornea thin it out and make it change to a conical shape from the gradual curve it is supposed to be.

In this particular case, authorities indicated that the doctor’s license ought to have been revoked or suspended and that he should have also faced disciplinary action many times. Dr. Caro continually botched Lasik eye surgeries, then didn’t tell his patients about complications that may happen after the surgery.

This eye doctor has been under scrutiny since 1997 for using unapproved laser equipment; so-called "black box" lasers. The doctor was evidently using questionable equipment that did not meet with FDA approval, to treat nearsightedness and astigmatism.

The patient who had to get further eye surgery and a cornea transplant chose to file a medical malpractice suit and will now need to wait until the case is settled or a verdict is handed down by the courts. It may well be a long wait, requiring the hiring of expert witnesses to testify about the actions of Dr. Caro. In addition, the patient will have had to pay for his additional eye surgeries and other medical expenses as a result of Dr. Caro’s negligence.

This patient may be very interested to know that he might be a candidate for lawsuit funding; funding that would allow him the time a needs to wait for a fair litigation result. A person who is having financial difficulties may face an enormous burden in trying to wait out the long litigation process without financial assistance. Litigation funding, usually accessible within 48 hours, would enable him pay his bills right away, perhaps leaving him in a position to be able to handle additional expenses as they arrive. A financially desperate plaintiff is not a positive infludence upon settlement negotiations. With lawsuit funding, the plaintiff has the luxury of knowing that his bills are current while he awaits justice.