Guiler malpractice trial begins over ...

Guiler malpractice trial begins over removal of ovaries

There are 462 comments on the Lexington Herald-Leader story from Jun 24, 2008, titled Guiler malpractice trial begins over removal of ovaries. In it, Lexington Herald-Leader reports that:

Attorneys delivered opening statements Tuesday in a malpractice trial involving one of six women who accused a Lexington obstetrician and gynecologist of unnecessarily removing their ovaries.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Lexington Herald-Leader.

CHEATER CHEATER

Houston, TX

#403 Jul 15, 2008
I still think it is very odd that one of his former employees was sueing him and now she is not. Funny how this employee had information about some of these patients and now she had up and moved away, dropping her actions against this doctor. It sounds like a pay off to me? I would locate this former employee and investigate her to find out what really took place.
Love the Possitive

Morehead, KY

#404 Jul 15, 2008
CHEATER CHEATER wrote:
I still think it is very odd that one of his former employees was sueing him and now she is not. Funny how this employee had information about some of these patients and now she had up and moved away, dropping her actions against this doctor. It sounds like a pay off to me? I would locate this former employee and investigate her to find out what really took place.
IMO this sounds like an out of court settlement and most likely she agreed to never discuss the details of the case, in order to receive the settlement. Again, this is just my opinion.
judy

AOL

#405 Jul 16, 2008
Love the Possitive wrote:
<quoted text>IMO this sounds like an out of court settlement and most likely she agreed to never discuss the details of the case, in order to receive the settlement. Again, this is just my opinion.
If this ex-employee settled, the details of the case could possibly be sealed .However, there would still be a record some where stating the suit had been settled, dropped, dismissed etc. Yes, even with an out of court settlement there would be a record. No such record has been located.
It could be the ex- employee just simply moved because she wanted too. There doesn't have to be a conspiracy in the works because she moved.

Thank you and Have a Great Day!

Judy
i doubt it

Dahlonega, GA

#406 Jul 16, 2008
judy wrote:
<quoted text>
If this ex-employee settled, the details of the case could possibly be sealed .However, there would still be a record some where stating the suit had been settled, dropped, dismissed etc. Yes, even with an out of court settlement there would be a record. No such record has been located.
It could be the ex- employee just simply moved because she wanted too. There doesn't have to be a conspiracy in the works because she moved.
Thank you and Have a Great Day!
Judy
just posting the article for easier reading....
http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/02/20....ap/in...

LEXINGTON, Kentucky (AP)-- Nine women are asking to join a lawsuit against a surgeon accused of branding the initials of his alma mater -- the University of Kentucky -- onto a patient's uterus during a hysterectomy.

The women -- including a former nurse of Dr. James M. Guiler -- say they discovered they had been similarly branded after watching videotapes Guiler had provided of their procedures.

"I didn't realize that he was doing this to everybody," said Dana Kelly, 41, a nurse who used to work in Guiler's office.

The original lawsuit was filed January 22 by Stephanie and David Means, who claim Guiler carved "UK" on Stephanie Means' uterus during her hysterectomy last August. She also had been given a videotape, and watched it after she experienced hemorrhaging following the surgery.

The nine women petitioned Fayette County Circuit Court on Wednesday to join the lawsuit, which asks for a jury trial. The lawsuit doesn't specify a dollar amount; the women are seeking punitive damages.
i doubt it

Dahlonega, GA

#407 Jul 16, 2008
Does this link help any? There should be copies of motions mad at the courthouse, of course you can also google and find info also. Just out of curiosity Judy, have you been checking the courthouse for this information? Sure seems to be alot of effort on your part. Did you find any info about the mother that died?

Ky Courts: More on Dr. Michael Guiler - His 1998 medical negligence trial resulted in defense verdict for Dr. Guiler, Dr. Bennett and Central Baptist Hospital
We posted stories yesterday on the current medical negligence trial against Dr. James Michael Guiler on claims he performed unnecessary hysterectomies, the UK branding incident, and the earlier published decision of the Kentucky Supreme Court in which the dismissal of a child's loss of consortium claim for the death of the child's mother was dismissed and eventually resulted in a change in the law recognizing loss of parental consortium claims. See, Ky Trials: Lexington Medical Negligence Trial Continued Following Claims of Juror Coercion.

But alas, the rest of the story has been provided to us compliments of Shannon Ragland and the Kentucky Trial Court Review on the eventual medical negligence trial of Dr. Guiler from the allegations arising from his actions in 1992 and the Kentucky Supreme Court Decision of Guiliana v. Guiler (parental consortium case).

For a little procedural history and epilogue on that earlier incident. The medical negligence allegations arose from a mother's death during a delivery in 1992 and which resulted in a wrongful death lawsuit against the obstetrician, anesthetist, and hospital. Among the various claims was a claim by the surviving children for a loss of parental consortium which was dismissed at trial and appealed to the Court of Appeals and discretionary review granted by the Supreme Court. The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed precedent and recognized in Kentucky a claim for a child's loss of parental consortium resulting in the claim being returned to the trial court for disposition. The trial result as reported in the Kentucky Trial Court Review was a favorable defense verdict for him and the other defendants.

260 - Medical Negligence
Guiliani v. Guiler et al, 93 CI 0223

Plaintiff: Ann Oldfather, Louisville & Jeffrey Darling, Lexington
Defense: David Trimble, Lexington for Guiler; Greg Jenkins, Lexington for Central Baptist; Ken Smith, Lexington for Bennett
i doubt it

Dahlonega, GA

#408 Jul 16, 2008
Ky Trials: Lexington Medical Negligence Trial Continued Following Claims of Juror Coercion
Today's Herald Leader has an AP story in which the civil trial against Dr. Guiler alleging unnecessary hysterectomies was continued due to protests outside of the courtroom. Fayette Circuit Court Judge Pamela Goodwine "postponed the trial until June 23, 2008, because of "pretrial publicity," including a letter circulated around the medical community."

In a subsequent (and much more detailed story than that of the AP) Brandon Ortiz at the Herald Leader reported that Judge Goodwine "said she will sanction a Lexington obstetrician and gynecologist, accused of performing unnecessary hysterectomies, over concerns by lawyers suing the doctor. The lawyers say that the physician's wife and employees attempted to taint potential jurors in a malpractice trial that was scheduled to start this week."

This medical negligence trial is centered on claims that Dr. Guiler performed unnecessary hysterectomies. Among the plaintiffs in this lawsuit were those claiming the "UK" branding a few years back.

This is not the first medical negligence case against Dr. Guiler that has made news. Lawyers will recall that Dr. Guiler was the defendant in the lawsuit Louisville attorney Ann Oldfather took up to the Kentucky Supreme Court (Guiliani v. Guiler) several years ago which held that minor children could maintain claim for loss of parental consortium for the wrongful death of their mother.

We were also able to locate on-line videos at the Smoking gun blog claiming a depiction of the UK marking - click here for video and story.

Here are the stories.

Trial postponed for doctor accused of unnecessary hysterectomies Herald Leader
A judge has delayed the malpractice trial of a doctor accused of performing unnecessary hysterectomies, concerned about what plaintiffs allege was an attempt by the doctor's supporters to coerce the jury pool.
Dr. James Michael Guiler stirred national attention in 2003 after a woman accused him of branding in her uterus with the letters "UK" - for his University of Kentucky alma mater - before a routine hysterectomy.

The trial scheduled to begin Tuesday was to deal not with that case but with allegations by several women that he had performed unnecessary surgeries.

Fayette Circuit Judge Pamela Goodwine told The Associated Press by phone Tuesday that she postponed the trial until June 23, 2008, because of "pretrial publicity," including a letter circulated around the medical community.

The letter, signed by 14 people, encouraged Guiler's supporters to show up en masse outside the courthouse with "signs that best represent Dr. Mike's Christian practice and demeanor." ***

The letter asks recipients to bring signs to the courthouse "that best represent Dr. Mike's Christian practice and demeanor."

It also encourages supporters to attend the trial and speak to reporters.

"It would be wonderful to express your reasons for choosing to become Dr. Mike's patient, how he has made your health and quality of life better, and why you feel this trial is ludicrous and frivolous," the letter states.

The letter is signed by 14 of "Dr. Mike's grateful employees" at Women's Care Center, including Guiler's wife, Sherry. The center is a defendant in the lawsuit.***

Judge to sanction doctor for letters
LAWYERS CALL THEM ATTEMPT TO TAINT MALPRACTICE JURY
me too

Dahlonega, GA

#409 Jul 16, 2008
I too will cancel my annual appointment coming up. I had no idea. What a jerk-I thought there was something wrong with the lack of eye contact. I thought maybe he was shy, now I know better.
judy

AOL

#410 Jul 17, 2008
i doubt it wrote:
Does this link help any? There should be copies of motions mad at the courthouse, of course you can also google and find info also. Just out of curiosity Judy, have you been checking the courthouse for this information? Sure seems to be alot of effort on your part. Did you find any info about the mother that died?
Ky Courts: More on Dr. Michael Guiler - His 1998 medical negligence trial resulted in defense verdict for Dr. Guiler, Dr. Bennett and Central Baptist Hospital
We posted stories yesterday on the current medical negligence trial against Dr. James Michael Guiler on claims he performed unnecessary hysterectomies, the UK branding incident, and the earlier published decision of the Kentucky Supreme Court in which the dismissal of a child's loss of consortium claim for the death of the child's mother was dismissed and eventually resulted in a change in the law recognizing loss of parental consortium claims. See, Ky Trials: Lexington Medical Negligence Trial Continued Following Claims of Juror Coercion.
But alas, the rest of the story has been provided to us compliments of Shannon Ragland and the Kentucky Trial Court Review on the eventual medical negligence trial of Dr. Guiler from the allegations arising from his actions in 1992 and the Kentucky Supreme Court Decision of Guiliana v. Guiler (parental consortium case).
For a little procedural history and epilogue on that earlier incident. The medical negligence allegations arose from a mother's death during a delivery in 1992 and which resulted in a wrongful death lawsuit against the obstetrician, anesthetist, and hospital. Among the various claims was a claim by the surviving children for a loss of parental consortium which was dismissed at trial and appealed to the Court of Appeals and discretionary review granted by the Supreme Court. The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed precedent and recognized in Kentucky a claim for a child's loss of parental consortium resulting in the claim being returned to the trial court for disposition. The trial result as reported in the Kentucky Trial Court Review was a favorable defense verdict for him and the other defendants.
260 - Medical Negligence
Guiliani v. Guiler et al, 93 CI 0223
Plaintiff: Ann Oldfather, Louisville & Jeffrey Darling, Lexington
Defense: David Trimble, Lexington for Guiler; Greg Jenkins, Lexington for Central Baptist; Ken Smith, Lexington for Bennett
Actually, I work with the courthouse and have easy access to records. As long as they are not sealed,anyone can pull any record they wish too. There's a few helpful sites as well, that will allow anyone to search free of charge.In most instances one would have to physically go to the courthouse to pull the records.Otherwise the details are left out or you'll have to pay.

In order to form an opinion, I like to have as much information as possible before doing so. A few,on this forum, go by hear-say alone without taking the time to research anything.It's an emotional issue,however,IMO, one can not make an informed opinion on emotion alone.Emotions, in some instances, tend to get the better of some.

What has been found so far concerning the mother who passed during delivery is the same as the article you posted above. A large portion of that particular case has been sealed due to minor children being involved.As I find information on that case I'll be more than happy to share it here.

I also find it interesting that no one has mentioned anything about the jurors who found Guiler innocent.It's also interesting none of the jurors have given interviews etc. Although , there could an order in place regarding the jury speaking of the case. The jury had to hear and beleive the evidence put before them to find Guiler innocent.
Love the Possitive

Morehead, KY

#411 Jul 17, 2008
judy wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I work with the courthouse and have easy access to records. As long as they are not sealed,anyone can pull any record they wish too. There's a few helpful sites as well, that will allow anyone to search free of charge.In most instances one would have to physically go to the courthouse to pull the records.Otherwise the details are left out or you'll have to pay.
In order to form an opinion, I like to have as much information as possible before doing so. A few,on this forum, go by hear-say alone without taking the time to research anything.It's an emotional issue,however,IMO, one can not make an informed opinion on emotion alone.Emotions, in some instances, tend to get the better of some.
What has been found so far concerning the mother who passed during delivery is the same as the article you posted above. A large portion of that particular case has been sealed due to minor children being involved.As I find information on that case I'll be more than happy to share it here.
I also find it interesting that no one has mentioned anything about the jurors who found Guiler innocent.It's also interesting none of the jurors have given interviews etc. Although , there could an order in place regarding the jury speaking of the case. The jury had to hear and beleive the evidence put before them to find Guiler innocent.
I too like to research issues that interst me. Your post is all smoke and mirrors, where as the posts from "i doubt it" actually contains useful info that can be verified. Since you work @ the courthouse, I would have thought you'd share your knowlege long before now, you post so frequently.
i doubt it

Dahlonega, GA

#412 Jul 17, 2008
Judy, in case you didn't know, emotions make us human. Compassion, empathy, happiness, sadness, anger, thoughtfulness, ect. Without these emotions we would be cold hearted individuals-which no doubt some people are-otherwise they would not intentionally disrespect the wishes of others or intentionally harm others (as he obviously has). Empathy, respect and compassion are the three major emotions that this man lacks.
Who cares Anymore

Morehead, KY

#413 Jul 17, 2008
i doubt it wrote:
Judy, in case you didn't know, emotions make us human. Compassion, empathy, happiness, sadness, anger, thoughtfulness, ect. Without these emotions we would be cold hearted individuals-which no doubt some people are-otherwise they would not intentionally disrespect the wishes of others or intentionally harm others (as he obviously has). Empathy, respect and compassion are the three major emotions that this man lacks.
I agree with you, people like Judy do not possess those emotions either. She is obviously a very cold female, or a man posting as a female. She can post all the legal crap she wants, but the fact is--this Dr. will meet the devil in hell! He does not need to be anywhere around females as a OB or Gyn.
judy

AOL

#414 Jul 21, 2008
Love the Possitive wrote:
<quoted text>I too like to research issues that interst me. Your post is all smoke and mirrors, where as the posts from "i doubt it" actually contains useful info that can be verified. Since you work @ the courthouse, I would have thought you'd share your knowlege long before now, you post so frequently.
A matter of opinion is harldy what one would call "smoke and mirrors." The information that has been provided by a few here are articles that we all probably have read at some point. It's a very long stretch from being new information or something most did not already know.

Again, the issue of the jurors finding Guiler innocent has been side-stepped. It's the same old poor attempt of insulting and disregarding the facts the jury made their decision upon. Why is that?

Thank You and Have A Great Day!
Judy
judy

AOL

#415 Jul 21, 2008
i doubt it wrote:
Judy, in case you didn't know, emotions make us human. Compassion, empathy, happiness, sadness, anger, thoughtfulness, ect. Without these emotions we would be cold hearted individuals-which no doubt some people are-otherwise they would not intentionally disrespect the wishes of others or intentionally harm others (as he obviously has). Empathy, respect and compassion are the three major emotions that this man lacks.
I agree emotions make us human. However, the courts and juries do not rule on emotion. They rule on evidence alone. That is the point I was trying to make in an earlier response. In most court proceedings it is explained to jurors to rule on the evidence. As did this particular jury.
They obviously heard evidence that convinced them Guiler was innocent.

Thank You and Have A Great Day!

Judy
judy

AOL

#416 Jul 21, 2008
Who cares Anymore wrote:
<quoted text>I agree with you, people like Judy do not possess those emotions either. She is obviously a very cold female, or a man posting as a female. She can post all the legal crap she wants, but the fact is--this Dr. will meet the devil in hell! He does not need to be anywhere around females as a OB or Gyn.
When one is ordered to jury duty, it is mandated by law, personal opinions and feelings be put aside to rule on the evidence being submitted only. Otherwise, it would be vigilante justice. The response above,again, has proved the point I was trying to make. If emotions were allowed to rule the courts, there would not be justice for anyone.

No, the facts are this jury found Guiler innocent of any wrong doing.Yet this "little sliver of fact" has yet to be addressed. There can be no debate the jury heard and saw evidence that convinced them Guiler was innocent.

I have based my opinion in this case on personal experience and on the evidence . That does not in any fashion make myself nor anyone else, cold hearted or a man posing as woman. Your comment is a very poor attempt to side step the fact the jury heard and believed damning evidence Guiler was and is innocent of the charges.

Thank You and Have A Great Day!

Judy
gullible judy

Morehead, KY

#417 Jul 21, 2008
ignorant judy is back because she has nothing better to do. dr. guiler is going to hell.
gullible judy

Morehead, KY

#418 Jul 21, 2008
he is going to hell along with his wife
just a friend

Morehead, KY

#419 Jul 21, 2008
Gimme a break, not all jurors put aside their personal feelings and/or beliefs. More often than not they bring their own life experiences to the table and more often than not there is jury coersion (as there was in this case when he and his wife sent out letters last year which led to postponement of the trial...).

He was tried by a panel of his own jurors. While the paper stated that 3 of the jurors were adamantly for the woman. I thinkk if you asked around you would find that for some reason...hmmm...much of the damning evidence against the doctor had either been "lost" from her medical chart or objected by the defendant and allowed in only by a by vow in which case the jurors are not allowed to be present. Anyway, he is guilty in the eye of the average public and that is all that matters.
Love the Possitive

Morehead, KY

#420 Jul 21, 2008
gullible judy wrote:
he is going to hell along with his wife
I don't condone the DR. or his actions. But it is not for any of us on Earth to determine where this man will spend eternity. Judy, the jury was not all convinced, it was a Lexington jury. Hopefully, it will be appealled. I haven't heard. And you too Have a Great Day!!!
judy

AOL

#421 Jul 22, 2008
Love the Possitive wrote:
<quoted text>I don't condone the DR. or his actions. But it is not for any of us on Earth to determine where this man will spend eternity. Judy, the jury was not all convinced, it was a Lexington jury. Hopefully, it will be appealled. I haven't heard. And you too Have a Great Day!!!
Yes, I agree-it is not for anyone other than a higher power to determine where Guiler will spend eternity. It amazes me that some here preach and condemn Guiler all in the same breath. IMO, that's not very christian. It's more of a form of revenge,IMO.
Also, instead of merely saying "I disagree and here's why" a few here, attempt to insult and degrade because we all do not have the same opinion.It would be a perfect world indeed if all agreed on everything. Sadly, the world does not work this way.

IMO, I think the case will be appealed.That's usually done within 30 days of the previous verdict.Although it can take a little longer than that some times.There usually is some form evidence that wasn't heard in the first trial which is the basis for the appeal.

I had read some where three of the jurors weren't convinced,however, the remaining jurors were. The law mandates they all reach a verdict they can all agree upon. Which was done.The jurors obviously heard evidence which led to a not guilty verdict. It would be interesting to see the documents that led the jury to this verdict.There must be some kind of court order involved concerning the jurors speaking on how and why they came to this decision.As far as I know none have made any statements to the media etc.

Thank you and Have A Great Day!

Judy
gullible judy

Morehead, KY

#422 Jul 22, 2008
judy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I agree-it is not for anyone other than a higher power to determine where Guiler will spend eternity. It amazes me that some here preach and condemn Guiler all in the same breath. IMO, that's not very christian. It's more of a form of revenge,IMO.
Also, instead of merely saying "I disagree and here's why" a few here, attempt to insult and degrade because we all do not have the same opinion.It would be a perfect world indeed if all agreed on everything. Sadly, the world does not work this way.
IMO, I think the case will be appealed.That's usually done within 30 days of the previous verdict.Although it can take a little longer than that some times.There usually is some form evidence that wasn't heard in the first trial which is the basis for the appeal.
I had read some where three of the jurors weren't convinced,however, the remaining jurors were. The law mandates they all reach a verdict they can all agree upon. Which was done.The jurors obviously heard evidence which led to a not guilty verdict. It would be interesting to see the documents that led the jury to this verdict.There must be some kind of court order involved concerning the jurors speaking on how and why they came to this decision.As far as I know none have made any statements to the media etc.
Thank you and Have A Great Day!
Judy
there is not one thing Christian about Dr. Guiler. God is not involved when it has come to Dr. Guilers decisions. God was nowhere near these women protecting them. this has to do with one entity, and one entity only-the devil.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brooks Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Last Post Wins (Mar '11) 4 hr _FLATLINE-------- 8,345
Trinity murders 1980's / Victor Tate (Nov '09) 5 hr Jld66 32
Scott sanders 6 hr Anonymous 1
Mall St Matthews Riots 7 hr Homie 426
new Mayor James 9 hr old friend 20
Plastic surgery 11 hr Meat Curtains 2
Doom for Louisville, KY 12 hr Little Mister 5
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brooks Mortgages