Certified by The Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Lawyer

phone icon609-397-5554




Roger Mitchell of the firm of Roger S. Mitchell LLC obtained $1.25 million medical malpractice settlement on the eve of trial for his clients, Tammy Kashman, and her father, Robert Kashman. Tammy Kashman lost all kidney function and required a transplant from her father because the defendant treating physician failed to provide appropriate care in spite of his review of abnormal kidney function results shown on quarterly blood tests performed over a two year period.

The victims were never informed about the slow progression of kidney failure by the defendant treating physician. In fact, it was only after the family began treating with a different medical group that they learned that Tammy had a problem and by then it was too late.

The new treating physician immediately advised them of the problem after reviewing her blood test results. A kidney specialist confirmed the diagnosis. For almost one year the family had to deal with home dialysis treatments. Tammy then received a transplanted kidney from her father, Robert Kashman. Since that time, she has had to take medications to control her autoimmune system.

The treating doctor contended that his negligence was not responsible for Ms. Kashman’s loss of kidney function, because kidney failure would have occurred even if he had undertaken appropriate care. Mr. Mitchell was able to rebut this argument with the opinion of a highly regarded kidney specialist who stated that had medical intervention been timely, the disease could have been treated with no loss of her kidneys, nor any need for dialysis, transplant or autoimmune medications.

The settlement value was enhanced because Mr. Mitchell obtained an expert opinion from an economist, the former Chair of the Rutgers University Economics Department, indicating that Tammy and her family will be burdened with large future medical costs.

The defendant treating physician claimed that he was not liable to Robert Kashman who was not his patient and volunteered to donate a kidney to his daughter. These contentions were rejected by the trial court, and by the Appellate Division, which rejected defendant’s motion seeking leave to appeal.

March 8, 2005