Frilot L.L.C.

  • Established in 1995
  • Firm Size 45
  • Peer Reviews

    4.7/5.0 (88)
  • Profile Visibility [ i ]
    • #10 in weekly profile views out of 1,032 Law Firms in New Orleans, LA
    • #1,888 in weekly profile views out of 299,964 total law firms Overall
Attorney Awards

Medical Malpractice & Healthcare

The Medical Malpractice & Healthcare Litigation Practice Group at Frilot L.L.C. represents physicians, hospitals, nursing homes and other healthcare providers in the New Orleans area and across Louisiana. We believe in the power of experience handling in-service and general corporate matters as well as providing risk management services and seminars statewide. Following are the types of cases defended by this Group:

Medical malpractice defense

  • Physicians
  • Hospitals
  • Nursing Homes
  • Nurses
  • Dentists

Blood Products litigation

  • Hepatitis C
  • AIDS

Health Maintenance Organizations & Insurers

  • ERISA
  • Benefit claims against private insurers

Peer Review Actions
Medical Devices Product Liability

The firm represents a wide variety of healthcare clients, including:

  • National and regional multi hospital systems
  • Local hospitals
  • Nursing homes
  • Physicians and other individual healthcare providers
  • Medical schools
  • Universities and teaching institutions
  • Louisiana Patient’s Compensation Fund

Because of the wide diversity of the firm’s clients in this area, we have amassed a comprehensive library of medical literature and materials dealing with the unique legal issues facing today’s healthcare professionals. In addition, the firm has developed strong relationships with the local and national experts needed in the areas of healthcare and malpractice defense.

Representative Cases

Recent Jury Trial Victories

Finch v. Srinivas
On November 19, 2009, Frilot attorneys Peter E. Sperling and John B. Cazale obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice jury trial in St. Tammany Parish. In Finch v. Srinivas, No. 2001-12119, 22nd JDC, plaintiffs, the surviving spouse and daughter of the decedent patient, brought a wrongful death and survival action against Frilot's client, the treating gastroenterologist. The claim involved an alleged failure to timely diagnose and treat an abdominal obstruction which was complicated by significant vascular compromise. The patient died during surgery performed to decompress the abdomen. Plaintiffs' experts alleged that the defendant was negligent in performing unnecessary and time consuming tests; in electing to attempt conservative measures rather than taking the patient immediately to surgery; and in failing to recognize the severity of the medical condition from the outset based upon the patient's presentation to the emergency room. After a four day trial, the jury ruled in favor of the defendant gastroenterologist.

Leonard A. Martin, et al v. Lakeland Medical Center, et al
Frilot attorneys Peter E. Sperling and Nairda T. Colón (Lesa) obtained a directed verdict in a medical malpractice jury trial in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans held June 23-29, 2009. In Leonard A. Martin, et al v. Lakeland Medical Center, et al, the plaintiffs contended Kimberly Martin was not an appropriate candidate for a nurse midwifery program. Plaintiffs further claimed that once admitted to Lakeland Medical Center for preterm labor on October 31, 1994, Mrs. Martin should not have been treated with dual tocolytics. Mrs. Martin alleged she developed fluid overload, pulmonary edema, leading to an emergency c-section. Plaintiffs further contended the child's premature birth caused him to be diagnosed with cerebral palsy, asthma, and learning disorders. The trial court dismissed the case against Frilot’s client, Lakeland Medical Center, at the close of plaintiffs' evidence on the grounds that they failed to meet their burden of proof.

Norwood v. Medina
Frilot attorneys Peter E. Sperling and John B. Cazale obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice jury trial in the 19th Judicial District Court held January 5-8,2009. In Norwood v. Medina, plaintiffs were the 10 surviving children of a patient who died as the result of an ischemic stroke. Plaintiffs contended that the defendant internal medicine specialist failed to timely and appropriately treat the stroke. The Baton Rouge jury found that the defendant did not breach the applicable standard of care in his treatment of the decedent.

Dillon vs. Hubbell and Southern Pain & Anesthesia Consultants
Bruce A. Cranner obtained a defense verdict for a client in a medical malpractice case (Dillon vs. Hubbell and Southern Pain & Anesthesia Consultants) in Jefferson Parish. Our client, an anesthesiologist and pain management specialist, treated the plaintiff for persistent headaches and neck pain stemming from a work related incident. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant physician breached the standard of care in the performance of discogram and steroid injection procedures, failed to obtain adequate informed consents for the procedures and failed to keep medical records. However, a trial judge found no evidence presented to support the plaintiff’s claims and rendered a verdict in favor of the defense.

Peter E. Sperling and Angie M. Bowlin successfully defended Tulane University Hospital and Clinic in a slip and fall action filed on behalf of a husband and wife who fell at the hospital. Both plaintiffs sustained serious injuries and both underwent back surgeries. The falls occurred in an area of the hospital where Tulane’s housekeeping staff had just finished mopping the floor. Plaintiffs testified that there were no 'wet floor” signs in the immediate vicinity, while Tulane’s witnesses maintained that the signs were in place. In closing argument, plaintiffs’ counsel asked for an award in excess of seven figures for each plaintiff. After a two week trial, the jury in Orleans Parish returned a unanimous verdict in favor of Tulane.

Peter Sperling and John B. Cazale obtained a defense verdict for a client in the 19th Judicial District Court, East Baton Rouge Parish, before Judge William Morvant. The plaintiff alleged that our client, HealthSouth Surgi-Center of Baton Rouge, received an intravascular injection of anesthetic medications during an axillary nerve block. Plaintiff claimed that our client failed to aspirate the syringe with the anesthetic medications prior to injection of the anesthetic agents. These anesthetic agents were then injected into his artery, which traveled to his brain, resulting in long-term, residual neuropsychological damage. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defense, finding no breach of the standard of care.

Peter Sperling and John Cazale secured a victory on behalf of a nephrologist insured by St. Paul Travelers Insurance Company when a 12-member jury unanimously rendered a verdict in favor of the doctor. The medical malpractice case was tried in the 24th Judicial District Court for Jefferson Parish before Judge Hans Liljeberg. The events leading up to the case began when a patient died from a perforated ulcer. Suit was brought by the decedent’s wife and six adult children, alleging a failure on the doctor’s part to diagnose an ulcer at an earlier stage in treatment; failure to order appropriate tests to diagnose an ulcer; failure to appropriately refer the decedent to a gastroenterologist; failure to warn the decedent not to take certain medications which could lead to development of an ulcer, and failure to advise the decedent of the risks associated with taking certain medications which could lead to the development of an ulcer.

Marianne S. James, et al. v. John N. Kent, DDS, et al (2005)
Frilot L.L.C. successfully defended the State of Louisiana, LSU Dental School, in litigation involving TMJ implants. This complex medical device litigation has involved both defense of a national class action and over 650 individual cases. This lawsuit, filed as a national class action, in which plaintiffs accused LSU of hiding the results of earlier studies of the Teflon-coated jaw implant that ruined their health, was dismissed by an Orleans Parish Judge.

Bourgeois, et al v. A.P. Green Industries, Inc., et al, (La. 2001)
The firm defended a major manufacturer in Louisiana’s seminal medical monitoring class action: Bourgeois v. A.P. Green Industries, Inc., et al, and Bourgeois, et al v. A.P. Green Industries, Inc., et al.

Physician Defense Litigation

Bariatric Surgeon: The firm defended St. Paul and one of its insured physicians, a bariatric surgeon, in a medical malpractice case in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. The plaintiff’s survivors alleged that the defendant physician failed to properly monitor the patient during the post-operative period. After a 3 week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict and awarded the plaintiffs no money.

Pediatrician: The firm successfully defended a pediatrician in malpractice claim involving a brain damaged child. This case was tried before a jury.

Oral Surgeon: Members of the Medical Malpractice & Healthcare team successfully defended oral surgeon in a jury trial involving a malpractice/informed consent claim based upon complications following third molar extraction.

General Surgeon: A defense verdict was obtained for a surgeon in claim involving common bile duct injury following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

People (45)

0 Applied Filters

Refine Results

Admiralty & Maritime, Insurance Defense, Transportation and Trucking

Peer Reviews
No Reviews

Mass Tort & Class Actions, Medical Malpractice & Healthcare

Peer Reviews
4.7/5.0 (20) Reviews

Admiralty & Maritime, Energy & Environmental, Mass Tort & Class Actions, Products Liability

Peer Reviews
5.0/5.0

Medical Malpractice & Healthcare

Peer Reviews
No Reviews

Medical Malpractice & Healthcare, Professional Liability

Peer Reviews
4.6/5.0 (28) Reviews

Labor & Employment, Products Liability

Peer Reviews
5.0/5.0 (1) Review

Insurance Coverage, Professional Liability

Peer Reviews
4.9/5.0 (4) Reviews

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Admiralty & Maritime, Insurance Coverage, Transportation & Trucking

Peer Reviews
5.0/5.0 (1) Review

Admiralty & Maritime, Construction Law, Insurance Coverage & Defense, Mass Tort & Class Actions

Peer Reviews
4.7/5.0 (2) Reviews

Admiralty & Maritime, Mass Tort & Class Actions, Energy & Environmental, Construction Law, Insurance Coverage & Defense

Peer Reviews
4.3/5.0 (3) Reviews

Peer Reviews

4.7/5.0 (88 reviews)
  • Legal Knowledge

    4.7/5.0
  • Analytical Capability

    4.7/5.0
  • Judgment

    4.7/5.0
  • Communication

    4.7/5.0
  • Legal Experience

    4.7/5.0

*Attorneys who only have peer reviews prior to April 15, 2008 are not displayed.

Documents (5)

Documents by this Organization on Martindale.com

Diversity

Commitment to Diversity

Frilot L.L.C. is committed to fostering a working environment that promotes diversity. The firm believes that diversity of experience, diversity in clients and diversity in the courtroom makes us a more powerful legal resource.  We recruit, retain and advance qualified individuals of all backgrounds and cultural influences. This diversity makes for a richer environment which promotes creative thinking and innovative client solutions.

While we are encouraged by what we have accomplished in our pursuit of diversity, the firm strives to strengthen and advance our commitment to attract and retain women and minorities.  Recognizing that recruitment is only one facet of our overall commitment to diversity, we are also focused in our efforts to develop and sustain a work environment that empowers all people, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or background, to perform to the best of their abilities.

 

  1. Matter Budgeting and Financial Management

    • Does the firm establish formal budgets for client engagements? Yes
    • Are bills submitted electronically? Yes
  2. Quality Management

    • Does the firm conduct end of matter reviews? Yes
  3. Litigation General Best Practices

    • Does the firm have a formalized new associate litigation training/mentoring program? Yes
    • Does the firm's litigation department have a structured approach to early case assessment? For example: Does your firm implement a standard approach to determine risks and strengths early in a case to assess trial or settlement options? Yes
    • Does the firm have an established records management team to assist clients with records retention, compliance and litigation preparedness? Yes
  4. Litigation eDiscovery Best Practices

    • Does the firm have an established eDiscovery Committee? No
    • Does your firm have any educational programs designed to address the changing federal rules of civil procedure? No
    • Does the firm have a standardized litigation hold program in place for its clients? No
    • Does your firm have a standardized protocol to guide client data collection? (i.e. Maintaining chain of custody, utilizing forensically sound procedures) No
    • Does the firm have a standardized protocol to guide processing clients' edata? (i.e. all data produced in PDF, meta data preserved?) Yes
    • Does the firm have a standardized approach for document reviews across practice groups (i.e. established protocol for eDiscovery review depending on the needs of the case) Yes
  5. Vendor Management

    • Does the firm have preferred vendor relationships? Yes
  6. Knowledge Management

    • Does the firm have a knowledge management program? Yes
  7. Disaster Recovery

    • Does the firm have a disaster recovery plan in place? Yes

Locations (1)

Contact Frilot L.L.C.

Required Fields

Required Fields


By clicking on the "Submit" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Martindale and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The Internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.