‘Quirky’ eye doctor sued by patient

Dr-ChaseMargeret Mcgowan, an Essex Junction woman sued a Burlington eye doctor David Chase for pressurizing her to undergo unnecessary cataract surgery in 2003.

Chase did not have good skills as a doctor. Many times he treated patients based on predictions. However, he operated within the standard of care, didn't violate the consumer fraud act and there was no issue involving a lack of informed consent.

Again, the doctor had a strong love for surgery. He enjoyed performing eye operations. This blind desire impelled him to manipulate information on patient's charts. Thus even if the patient did not need a surgery he operated on them.

McGowan was one such unfortunate patient of Dr. Chase. She is seeking $300,000 in compensatory damages and $300,000 to $450,000 in punitive damages.The case was not dissolved until yesterday. Both parties were fighting on a strong base.

Dr. Chase however had a dark past since 2003. His license was suspended by the state in 2003 following reports that he had engaged in unprofessional conduct with scores of patients by performing unnecessary cataract surgeries. He was charged with fraud in federal court but was acquitted of the claims following a lengthy trial in 2005.

The state's Medical Practice Board in 2008 concluded that he had engaged in unprofessional conduct with 10 patients.

Chase, 72, closed his practice in 2003. The state board said last year it would allow him to reclaim his license if he took courses on ethics and patient communication, but Chase has not pursued that option.

Source:Burlington FreePress.com

Related?

3 Responses to “‘Quirky’ eye doctor sued by patient”

  1. T Lindberg Says:

    I would suggest that you remove the misstated information above as it relates to Dr. David Chase. I would consider the comments to not only to have been proven untrue in a court of law, but I would also consider them slanderous.

  2. T Lindberg Says:

    I would consider the above remarks regarding Dr. David Chase to not only be untrue and proven untrue in a court of law but further I may even consider them to be so outlandish as to also be considered slanderous

  3. T Lindberg Says:

    Chase did not have good skills as a doctor. Many times he treated patients based on predictions. However, he operated within the standard of care, didn’t violate the consumer fraud act and there was no issue involving a lack of informed consent.

    Again, the doctor had a strong love for surgery. He enjoyed performing eye operations. This blind desire impelled him to manipulate information on patient’s charts. Thus even if the patient did not need a surgery he operated on them.

    THESE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN PROVEN UNTRUE IN A COURT OF LAW AND I WOULD ALSO THINK THAT THEY ARE DOWN RIGHT SLANDEROUS AS WELL YOU SHOULD REVIEW FACT BEFORE POSTING GARBAGE IN THE INTERNET AS IF IT WERE FACT.

Leave a Reply


Protected by Comment Guard Pro