Gene Feeney is a veteran litigator who defends the interests of physicians and healthcare organizations in state and federal courts.
Gene also handles personal injury cases, including auto and premises liability matters. He argues cases on appeal in the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
Gene also assists local counsel, carriers, third party administrators and self insureds on the applicability of the Affordable Care Act to claims of future medical damages in all types of disciplines of catastrophic loss matters. The cost of future healthcare has been altered by the ability for those with pre-existing conditions to access insurance. He can assess the real costs of lifetime care.
Eugene P. (Gene) Feeney
Prevailed in a case involving a spinal surgery and placement of a posterior fusion device where the plaintiff alleged that the doctor failed to adequately achieve a fusion at the L4-L5 disk level and also alleged that the plaintiff was not a proper candidate for the surgery at issue. Both our defense expert and the doctor testified that after the plaintiff did not respond to initial conservative care measures. The doctor properly moved forward with the option of surgery. Additionally, there was expert testimony that the surgery at issue was performed well within the standard of care, and that the patient seemed to initially respond to the surgery and be satisfied with the outcome. During the trial, the plaintiff was effectively cross examined about earlier testimony that she had no prior history of back pain before presenting to the doctor. After a short deliberation, the Lehigh County jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of the defendants.
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a hospital client as well as the hospital's surgeon employee. The plaintiff underwent an esophagectomy to address his diagnosis of esophageal cancer. During surgery, a laparotomy sponge was left inside the plaintiff, which went undetected for several years. At that time, the plaintiff began complaining of abdominal pain and underwent a CT scan for the same, which revealed an intra-abdominal abscess as well as the presence of the retained sponge. The plaintiff underwent surgery to drain the abscess, during which time the retained sponge and the gallbladder were also removed. Just a few weeks later, the plaintiff underwent subsequent surgery for further draining of the abscess. The plaintiff initiated a lawsuit against the hospital as well as the surgeon. The court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against them. This motion was granted approximately two weeks prior to the start of jury trial. Not only did this save our client exposure from a potentially large jury award, but also saved the client the cost of trial and necessity of attendance of busy nurses and physicians during the duration of the trial.
Obtained dismissal on behalf of a surgeon client in a medical malpractice matter. The case involved allegations that the defendant surgeon negligently performed an exploratory laparotomy with right hemicolectomy for a mass and that the surgeon as well as the other co-defendants subsequently failed to diagnose and appropriately treat the plaintiff’s post-operative condition, which they further allege led to his death. After an investigation, it was determined that both the plaintiffs’ complaint and Certificate of Merit were deficient as to the defendant surgeon. The plaintiffs asserted that they would be relying on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to pursue their claim, which we deemed to be inappropriate under the controlling law. We filed a Motion to Strike the plaintiffs’ Certificate of Merit as being defective, which was ultimately granted by the Court.
Miller v. Sacred Heart Hospital, 753 A.2d 829 (Pa. Super. 2000)
Gregorio v. Zeluck, 678 A.2d 810 (Pa. Super. 1996)
570.961.2099 ext. 2233