Professional Negligence Law Reporter

In 2018, Doe, 69, underwent laboratory studies, including a blood test for CA 19-9, a tumor marker that may be elevated in the presence of pancreatic cancer. This test showed an elevated CA 19-9 enzyme that was nearly seven times the upper limit. The attending physician allegedly told Doe the test results were normal. The following year, after this physician had left the practice, Doe underwent further testing at that office. A repeat CA 19-9 enzyme test showed a level almost 17 times the normal limit. Doe underwent an evaluation and was diagnosed as having pancreatic cancer. Despite aggressive treatment, he died. He is survived by his wife and four adult children.

Suit against the practice and the physician who treated Doe in 2018 alleged failure to properly evaluate the elevated tumor marker. The plaintiff also asserted that the physician should have advised the practice to follow up on Doe’s tumor markers and that the practice should have reviewed Doe’s chart when the physician left to ensure that all items requiring follow-up were addressed.

The parties settled for $1.8 million.

Citation: Doe v. Roes, Confidential Dkt. No. (Va. Confidential Ct. Mar. 16, 2023).

Plaintiff counsel: AAJ members Travis W. Markley, Richard L. Nagle, and Heather E. Zaug; and James N. Knaack and Benjamin M. Wengerd, all of Reston, Va.