Dave Farnbauch sits down with ABC’s INsight to talk about the changes to the court system in light of COVID-19. 

You can read the full transcript below, or access a PDF of the transcript.

Charity: Welcome back to INsight. I’m here with Dave Farnbauch from Sweeney Law Firm. We’re going to talk today about what’s happened in the court system since the COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to assume that there haven’t been many jury trials since the stay-at-home order happened in late March and since everything that’s gone on? 

David Farnbauch: Right. Just like every other, institution and organization, the court system has been impacted by COVID. And I’d say the biggest change that I’ve seen is the courts issuing orders this spring to put sort of a moratorium on jury trials. There have been some bench trials. That’s where the judge is there. The courts have actually been very creative. I’ve heard of some trials by zoom. But the big change is putting potential jurors at risk by bringing them into a courthouse and putting them amongst other jurors. And so the courts have really been cautious about resuming jury trials and they put together, I think, a very careful plan so that when they do bring jurors back in it really minimizes the risk of COVID-19. 

Charity: Why am I not surprised that there’ve been some by zoom? I feel like we’ve done everything by zoom lately. Let’s talk about that plan. What are they doing as they start to bring jurors back? What’s the court going to do to make sure that people who are summoned to be jurors are going to be safe as they come into the courthouse. 

David Farnbauch: All right. So I’d say some of the basic things that they’re doing for a lot of things, which is to obviously check the temperature of everybody comes in, masks are mandatory. And then what they’ve done is changed, Charity, the configuration of the courtroom. We don’t have, we’re not going to have the traditional jury box. We’re going to use the whole courtroom, like traditionally where the audience would be the gallery in the courtroom, that’s where the jurors are going to be. And of course they have rules about social distancing in the courtroom. Some courts have put in some plexiglass to minimize the transmission of COVID in the courtroom. So those are the main things, but it’s taken awhile to sort of formulate a plan and implement all these things. 

Charity: Do you think the COVID-19 pandemic will make a difference in how many prospective jurors will respond to a summons? 

David Farnbauch: Well, that’s the concern, in fact in an organization that I belong to we recently commissioned a company that does research and focus group testing to find out the answer to that question. Which is are people, prospective jurors that get a summons for jury service, are they likely to actually show up for jury service, given the risk. It’s a fluid thing, but everybody would agree there are still risks there if you go to a public building like a courthouse. And what’s interesting is the research that’s been done shows that only about 20% of the people that they surveyed and these focus group tests are really sort of hardline that they will not respond to a summons for jury service in the midst of a pandemic like this. And about one third are somewhat comfortable if the court implements these measures that I just talked about; mask and social distancing and not being in a jury box. 

David Farnbauch: And then to our surprise are there were about 40% of the respondents that said as long as we have masks, and as long as the court is saying that we’ve got appropriate measures in place to protect us, they felt very comfortable with showing up for jury service, which was kind of a big surprise to everybody. So we still have that segment of the population that feels that call of duty. They get a summons for jury service, and they feel like it’s their civic duty to go to the courthouse, even in the midst of a pandemic to make sure that the justice system goes forward. 

Charity: It’s our civic duty to serve our jury duty and to vote. That’s what, that’s what we have to do. If you have questions about something in the legal world I have to do is give Sweeney Law Firm a call 420-3137, check him out online. We’ll be right back.

Posted in Videos | No Comments »

Dave Farnbauch stopped by ABC’s INsight to talk about what informed consent is and what it means for patients going into surgery. 

You can read the full transcript below, or access a PDF version of the transcript.

Charity: Welcome back to INsight. Meet with Dave Farnbauch from Sweeney Law Firm. Today, we’re going to talk about informed consent for patients. So what does informed consent mean when patients are going into surgery? Is it that long form that we sign right before, the one that I don’t necessarily read everything on that I sign right before we go into surgery? 

David Farnbauch: Yeah. I would say Charity that the typical patient thinks of informed consent is simply a long form with a lot of medical jargon and legal jargon that is presented to them right before surgery or shortly before they undergo some treatment that they’re asked to quickly peruse and sign and people have this misconception that if they sign that form and then they have some of the complications that are on that form that they are precluding themselves from pursuing a legal case because they signed some informed consent form. And that’s just not the case. 

Charity: You do think that, you think ‘Oh, I’m out of luck because I signed and I gave up my rights.’ So tell me, about some situations where informed consent becomes an issue in legal cases. 

David Farnbauch: Well, I think the best place to start Charity is just to explain what informed consent is, at least in Indiana, and what the law requires. In a nutshell, what the law requires is that the treating healthcare provider provide you with the important facts that a reasonable patient would want to know before you undergo treatment. I try to boil it down that way; what would a reasonable person want to know before you undergo treatment? So it really goes beyond just presenting you with a form. A doctor has to sit down and explain sort of the pros and cons and the risks to you, to the point where you understand it so that you can make an informed decision about whether you want to go forward with this particular mode of treatment or some other mode of treatment. So that’s what informed consent is now where it becomes an issue in legal cases is where 

David Farnbauch: Dr. King and I see it come up the most is when a patient will undergo some treatment. Mostly the cases that we handle are complications from something that was done and how those complications were managed. And so when you undergo a procedure and things go wrong and then the tasks for the medical providers is to get you back on track health wise and respond to the complication or respond to the emergency. That’s where informed consent can really rear its ugly head, because a lot of times doctors get in a position where they should be referring you to another doctor to manage those complications. Or a lot of times the doctor will feel like ‘Well, let’s just give it more time and see how this plays out’. And oftentimes deciding to ride it out and give it more time ends up being ultimately the wrong decision that you needed some emergency surgery to correct the problem. 

David Farnbauch: What the law requires is if there is a complication and there is that kind of a situation, the doctor has to sit down and be candid with you. You know, here are options, maybe there’s another doctor that’s available that should be managing your care and here are your options so that patients can know the important facts and make decisions about how they want their care managed. So informed consent arises much more than people think in medical malpractice cases. And it has nothing to do with those forms that you sign. I’m not saying those forms that you sign have no significance, but most of the time the focus in a medical malpractice case, if there’s a claim for failure of a doctor to provide you with informed consent, those forms that you signed do not provide any sort of a defense for the healthcare provider. 

Charity: And even though informed consent really is more verbal, it has to be documented right? In my chart as a patient, it has to be documented in my chart. 

David Farnbauch: Yeah. We see this all the time in medical malpractice cases where there’s a claim of informed consent, where the doctor says ‘I told the patient this, and I told the patient that’ he goes into a lot of detail three years later after the fact about what he told the patient. And the problem we see Charity is a lot is those conversations are not documented in the patient’s chart. So a lot of times a doctor or a healthcare provider can provide a lot of cover for informed consent if they just document those conversations that they had with the patient in the chart so that we can see they actually did have those conversations. 

Charity: Well, if you have questions about an informed consent and in a medical issue you had anything else like that, any questions about medical malpractice, all you have to do is give them a call at Sweeney Law Firm 420-3137. They’ll be glad to talk it through with you. We’ll be right back.

Posted in Videos | No Comments »

Posted in Videos | No Comments »

David Farnbauch has been recognized in the 27th Edition of The Best Lawyers in America(C) in the practice areas of Medical Malpractice Law – Plaintiffs and Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs. Mr. Farnbauch has achieved a Best Lawyers award continuously since 2009.

Inclusion in Best Lawyers is based on a rigorous peer-review survey comprising more than 9.4 million confidential evaluations by top attorneys. For more than three decades, Best Lawyers has been regarded as the most credible measure of legal integrity and distinction in the United States.

Posted in News | No Comments »

Choose the Right Doctor Commercial for Sweeney Law Firm

Posted in Commercials, Videos | No Comments »

David Farnbauch to serve as Program Chair for Masters of Med-Mal Advocacy event on August 21, 2020. 

Farnbauch will be joined by Patrick Malone, Lance D. Cline, and Jerry Garau while they discuss medical malpractice advocacy. 

Learn more about this educational event.

Posted in News | No Comments »

Dave Farnbauch was one of several presenters to discuss ongoing legal challenges during the current environment. Farnbauch, representing Sweeney Law Firm, presented on Going Wireless in the Courtroom with Wolfvision during the May 20th session of the virtual seminar. 

The 32nd Annual Lifetime Achievement Seminar was held virtually from May 19th-20th. Over 40 presenters joined the event.

Posted in News | No Comments »

Confidential settlement of Federal Employers Liability Act (“FELA”) claim in connection with the negligence of a railroad. The plaintiff suffered amputations that ended his career as a railroad employee.

Posted in Other Practice Areas, Sweeney Case Results, Sweeney Case Results - Other Practice Areas | No Comments »

$515,000 settlement for medical malpractice for a hospital’s failure to timely diagnose and treat pressure ulcers resulting in infection and subsequent death. The adult children of the decedent retained the Sweeney Law Firm to pursue a claim for wrongful death. 

Posted in Sweeney Case Results, Sweeney Case Results - Wrongful Death, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

$1.087 million settlement for medical malpractice for a hospital’s negligence in connection with the failure to monitor the placement of a PEG tube. The patient developed peritonitis and sepsis and subsequently died as a result of the malpractice. The plaintiff’s spouse retained Sweeney Law Firm to pursue a claim for wrongful death.

Posted in Sweeney Case Results, Sweeney Case Results - Wrongful Death, Wrongful Death | No Comments »