Veterinay malpractice

[Gferraro]

What is the name of your state? Texas

Our dog got hit by a car last weekend while vacationing on a beach in Texas. We called an emergency vet (VCA animal hospital) and diagnosed the dog with hip luxation. After sedating the daog and reducing the hip they let me go asking to controll the dog movements (what is that mean?). On Monday I showed the dog to my vet who took xrays and said that the hip came out again and was surprised the daog did have any sling. Since he stayed aver night with the hip dislocated the ligament were probably too week to hold the hip in place and he needed sugery. I had to find a sugeon to operate on the dog which cost $1255 who was also surprised that he dog did not have a sling after the reduction.

I have feeling that letting us leave without a sling contributed to the reluxation and lead to the operation. It was a mistake and I intend to sue the vet torecover the cost ofthe surgery.

As I am inexperienced in suing and in vetenary malpractice any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.

 

[JETX]

It was a mistake and I intend to sue the vet torecover the cost ofthe surgery.

And what will your answer be when the defense (if you sue) asks you "Aren't you responsible for the injury due to your allowing him to run free and not having him under your control?"

 

[Gferraro]

And what will your answer be when the defense (if you sue) asks you "Aren't you responsible for the injury due to your allowing him to run free and not having him under your control?"

Standing up on his leg is not runnig free. A sling would have avoided putting pressure on his leg and locked the hip in place as an orthopedic surgeon explained. Cages is what they used to confine dogs att he vet and a cage will not have prevented him from standing up anyway.

The point that I want to make is that I have yet to find a vet or litterature that says not to put a sling after a closed reduction. The fact that she did not put a slig is, in my opinion below the "standard of care" (found that on the net) and she should have used one as others do to increase the chance for recovery of my dog. Not putting one is simply a mistake and lead to the surgery.

 

[JETX]

Standing up on his leg is not runnig free.

That is not what I mean.

Your initial post said, "Our dog got hit by a car last weekend while vacationing on a beach in Texas."
If the dog had been on a leash, or otherwise 'under your control'.... the dog wouldn't have been hit by a car, correct??
Summary: A good argument could be made that your negligence (in not having control of your animal) was a cause of the initial injury.... making you at least partially liable. I am not saying that is the case.... but an argument could be made.

As to any possible veterinary negligence, that would require a complete review of the circumstances.... and treatment provided. From your post, a further argument could be made that you didn't "control the movement" of your animal as advised by the vet.

 

[Gferraro]

That is not what I mean.

You are correct the initial accident is my fault. Then I go to a vet hoping that he will be well cared for, but the vet only goes 50% of the recommended treatment. Not given my dog all the chances or at least the chances that he should have gotten with the whole 100% and the 50% missing resulted in a reluxation of the hip.

I know it will be hard to proove but of I want to show that the treatment was imcomplete and hope to get something for that.

Thank you coming up with potential defence scenario. That helps.