Wednesday, November 25, 2015     Volume: 30, Issue: 17

Weekly Poll
What would you like to see the United States do about ISIS?

Air strikes are a start, but let’s put boots on the ground.
Look for less confrontational ways to address the situation, like economic sanctions and a multilateral peacekeeping effort.
They’re a pissed off byproduct of the 2003 Iraq invasion. Maybe it’s time to stop creating more terrorists.
Let’s begin by helping the refugees that fled from their violence.

Vote! | Poll Results

RSS Feeds

Latest News RSS
Current Issue RSS

Special Features
Search or post SLO County food and wine establishments

New Times / News

The following article was posted on January 29th, 2014, in the New Times - Volume 28, Issue 27 [ Submit a Story ]
The following articles were printed from New Times [] - Volume 28, Issue 27

Payout reduced in negligence case


Charles Blevins, who was awarded more than half a million dollars in a negligence lawsuit against Coastal Surgical Institute, will receive less than half that amount due to legal restrictions on such cases.

Blevins had sued Coastal Surgical Institute in Pismo Beach for negligence after suffering a bacterial infection following knee surgery. Three other patients also were infected with pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteria, though they haven’t come forward.

However, the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 places a $250,000 cap on medical malpractice cases, limiting the amount that can be legally awarded to Blevins.

On Jan. 29, San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Martin Tangeman approved his earlier tentative motion, which awards Blevins compensation for damages, but limits that compensation to the legal limit. In all, Blevins is entitled to receive $250,000 of the $543,034 awarded by the jury.

Coastal Surgical Institute’s David Hillings argued that the amount should be further reduced, but he was overruled on every motion. When Blevins’ attorney Jeffrey Stulberg was asked to respond to the motions, he told Tangeman simply, “It’s too preposterous to respond.”

After more than three years in court, Blevins said he was “euphoric” after the jury’s verdict, but as the case drags on he finds it “very frustrating to be faced with motion after motion to further stall the settlement, which doesn’t seem right.”