• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

IME

Williams v. Thomas Development Corporation et. al., 2006 NLTD 44 (CanLII) — 2006-03-09

Dr. Lloyd has retired from surgical practice since 1999.  Dr. Lloyd has done approximately 1,000 surgical procedures, about 10 percent of these procedures involving the thoracic spine.  He has also written and done research on spinal issues.  He was qualified to give opinion evidence in the field of orthopedic surgery with an emphasis on complex diagnostic issues as it relates to the spine, treatment of the spine and the treatment of disc injuries.  He interviewed the Plaintiff for about one and a half hours.

Dr. Lloyd took the position that without pain for the thoracic region, a fracture was unlikely.  He concluded emphatically that the accident did not fracture Dr. Williams’ thoracic spine.  His opinion was based on a one and a one half hour interview, a review of the contemporary medical history on September the 9th and September 15th.  Dr. Lloyd does 400 independent medical examinations per year.  This is more than one per day.  Dr. Lloyd had not operated since 1996.  He has never done the operation conducted by Dr. Fehlings.  He is not a neurosurgeon.  He could not offer a diagnosis.  He concluded that Dr. Fehlings’ operation on Dr. Williams was unnecessary.  He reaches this opinion on the basis that the Plaintiff’s symptoms were recurring four months post-surgery.  It was his opinion that the surgery did not help with her symptom complex.  He, therefore, disagrees with Dr. King on this point.  He was of the opinion that there was not a fracture.  Surprisingly, he claims there was not even a cord compression.  On this point, he disagrees with Dr. Fehlings who did the actual surgery on Dr. Williams.  He also disagrees with Dr. Brown, who says there was cord compression.  Dr. King was of the opinion that there was cord compression.  It also meant that if Dr. Lloyd was right, the radiologist reached an improper conclusion in his report.

Dr. Lloyd did not impress me with his conclusions.  Dr. Lloyd was asked to do an opinion for the Defendant, as he does for hundreds of other cases.  He interviewed Dr. Williams for one and a half hours and did a review of the medical reports provided and he gave his opinion.

Comments are closed.