Lack of Consent Form No Problem
Mr. Jakub successfully defended a NYC pain management physician during a two-week jury trial. The patient alleged that the physician administered a trigger point injection without her informed consent and that during the injection he punctured her lung, causing a pneumothorax.
During trial, Mr. Jakub conceded that the patient was not provided with an informed consent form to sign before the procedure and further acknowledged that the patient was not advised that a pneumothorax was a risk of the injection. Mr. Jakub instead argued that the pneumothorax was a known and accepted, yet rare, complication of a properly-performed trigger point injection which the physician was not required to disclose to the patient. The physician testified that he obtained a verbal consent from the patient after advising her that the injection could cause pain, bleeding and/or an infection.
Several hours after the injection was administered, the patient was diagnosed with a pneumothorax which was surgically treated through the placement of a chest tube. The jury was asked to determine whether the physician obtained an informed consent from the patient prior to the administration of the trigger point injection, despite the absence of a signed consent form and despite a concession from the physician that the possibility of a pneumothorax was not disclosed.
After several hours of deliberations, the jury concluded that Mr. Jakub’s client provided the patient with sufficient information before the procedure and that he was not liable for her injuries or claimed damages.
July 31, 2104, Supreme Court, New York County, Justice Joan B. Lobis (Index #805120/12)
Latest Blogs
Defense Verdict re Allegations of Bowel Obstruction Causing Stroke
New York, March 16, 2023. Andrew Garson continued his string of jury verdicts, with a unanimous defense verdict after a four-week 2023 trial in Suffolk County Supreme Court. Plaintiff, a 42 year old nurse-midwife and Stony Brook professor, was permanently brain damaged and crippled, rendered blind, and was unable to work and perform activities of daily living after she suffered a stroke allegedly due to the Defendant’s failure to timely diagnose a bowel obstruction. This resulted in septic shock, brain hemorrhage, coma, and a massive bleeding disorder. Plaintiff’s claim arose from a gastric bypass procedure performed by Defendant, as shortly thereafter she complained of problems including excruciating pain and gastrointestinal malfunction persisting over an eighteen-month period, requiring longstanding treatment with narcotics. She claimed that Defendant continually advised her, despite her persistent and progressive complaints, that this was a normal part of recovery and she “should go live her life.” At trial, Plaintiff’s central theory was that Defendant never considered or recognized that there was an abdominal hernia present, causing a bowel obstruction. The claim was that if the Defendant had performed timely surgical intervention, the patient’s catastrophic and permanent injuries would have been avoided. Three experts were called in to support Plaintiff’s claims, asserting that imaging studies during the period at issue demonstrate injuries to her GI tract and a bowel obstruction. Plaintiff subsequently underwent multiple surgeries, removing 80% of her bowel as well as a number of other procedures, to attempt to alleviate her neurologic and abdominal deficits.
G & J Partners Score Recent Jury Victories
In May 2019, Mr. Jakub successfully defended a family practice physician accused of causing the wrongful death of her patient, a 72 year-old female. Mr. Jakub’s client had treated the decedent for various conditions over the course of many years and was charged with managing a complicated medical regimen to address heart disease, high blood pressure and diabetes. The patient developed an acute episode of gout for which Mr. Jakub’s client prescribed Naprosyn. One month later the patient was taken by ambulance to a local hospital in acute renal failure where she died the next day from renal failure. Plaintiff claimed that the Naprosyn caused the patient’s acute renal failure due to its interaction with other medications the patient was taking and because of her underlying renal disease.
Mr. Jakub, through his client and through expert witnesses, marshaled an alternative explanation for the onset of renal failure and the patient’s death which the jury unanimously accepted. (Miklos v. Gonzales, Supreme Court, Bronx County No.: 20739/10)
Dismissal of Wrongful Life Case in Bronx County
Dismissal of Wrongful Life Case in Bronx CountyMichael J. Morris recently succeeded in obtaining a dismissal with prejudice on a challenging case,...
Defense Verdict Returned in Case in which Plaintiff Sought $25 Million for Pain & Suffering
Defense Verdict Returned in Case in which Plaintiff Sought $25 Million for Pain & SufferingAttorney Louis E. Jakub, Jr. obtained a unanimous...
Need A Consultant?
Praesent sit amet venenatis nisl nullam nulla erat pretium.Praesent sit amet venenatis nisl nullam nulla erat pretium.Praesent sit amet venenatis nisl nullam nulla erat pretium. Praesent sit amet venenatis nisl nullam
Primary Practices
Donec leo augue, vulputate a eros at, sollicitudin elementum dolor. Aliquam consequat mollis sapien sed ullamcorper.
- Criminal Law
- Business Law
- Family Law
Our Partners

James Doe
Corporate Lawyer

David Roberts
Corporate Lawyer

Jane Smith
Corporate Lawyer
Contact Us About Your Case
From Our Clients
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum mauris. Mauris in consequat mauris. Quisque non maximus ipsum.

“Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum.”

“Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum. Ut efficitur condimentum lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum.”

“Ut efficitur condimentum lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut efficitur condimentum. Ut efficitur condimentum lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.”
Recent News
Mr. Jakub Presents Lecture to Annual ACOOG Conference
On March 27, 2017 Mr. Jakub presented “The Defendant Doctor and the Deposition: Pitfalls, Opportunities and Practical Advice” at The American College of Osteopathic Obstetricians & Gynecologists Annual Conference held in Palm Springs, California.
The lecture exposed physicians in a high risk medical specialty to the realities of litigation, the questioning of their decision making processes and provided real world insight into the methods in which claims against physicians are built and defended. Mr. Jakub delivered this presentation to several hundred obstetrician-gynecologists from all over the country an then presided over a lively question and answer session which allowed the physicians to gain a further understanding of the true nature of a malpractice deposition and the opportunities such a deposition presents to enhance the doctor’s defense.
Plastic Surgeon Exonerated In Complex Complications Trial
On April 18, 2016, a Manhattan jury returned a unanimous defense verdict in favor of a New York City physician defended by Louis E. Jakub. Mr. Jakub’s client, a renowned plastic surgeon, performed a mastopexy (breast lift) procedure and inserted implants in a 47-year-old female actress and television producer. Post operative breast asymmetry was identified and required two corrective surgeries. The patient then developed multiple infections and a wound breakdown which necessitated surgical removal of the infected implants during a lengthy hospitalization. The patient went on to develop significant pain and motion limitations in her arms due to the build up of scar tissue. Further surgery was performed by another plastic surgeon to relieve the pain and reduce the scarring. At trial, the plaintiff claimed the initial surgery was negligently performed and that a revision procedure was undertaken prematurely which resulted in an infection and wound breakdown. Plaintiff also argued at trial that the surgeon failed to properly advise her of the risks associated with the surgeries and failed to obtain an informed consent
Summary Judgment Motions
Maria Black defended a pain management physician who was alleged to have negligently administered joint injections to the right hip of a 60-year-old nursing assistant for treatment of leg and lower back pain. Plaintiff maintained that the improperly administered injections caused irreversible damage to the sciatic nerve resulting in right foot drop and leaving the patient wheelchair bound. Defendant physician explained that the plaintiff’s contention was an anatomical impossibility since the nerves in the area of the injections, even if injured, could not result in right foot drop. The judge presiding over the case, agreed with the defense position that the proper placement of the needle during the injections was evidenced by intra-operative images captured under fluoroscopic guidance, which eliminated the possibility of any mechanical damage to the nerves outside the region of the sacroiliac joint and granted summary judgment for the defendant physician. Subsequent nerve conduction studies revealed that the plaintiff’s right foot drop was caused by the affects and progression of the neurological disease, ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease).