Couple accuses Rosinsky Law Office for negligence during lawsuit

By Kyla Asbury | Nov 19, 2015

HUNTINGTON – A couple is suing Rosinsky Law Office after they claim it was negligent during the course of their lawsuit.

Timothy P. Rosinsky also was named as a defendant in the suit.

On June 24, 2008, Mackie Robertson underwent a total left knee replacement at the Huntington VA Medical Center, which was performed by Dr. Vincent Waldron, according to a complaint filed in Cabell Circuit Court.

Robertson and his wife, Angela Robertson, claim following the surgery, Mackie Robertson continued to experience significant pain and swelling in his left knee and he continued to follow up at the Huntington VAMC and with Waldron for several months regarding his complaints.

Apart from his pain complaints and swelling, Mackie Robertson also experienced persistent drainage from his surgical wounds and, despite these symptoms, neither the VAMC or Waldron took the appropriate precautions to rule out infection, including an aspiration of the knee joint and/or peripheral blood work, according to the suit.

The Robertsons claim as a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of the breaches in standard of care by the VAMC and Waldron, Mackie Robertson suffered multiple complications, including organ failure, septic shock and a prosthetic knee infection, requiring extensive medical treatment.

The plaintiffs hired Rosinsky and his law office in order to pursue damages and to litigate a medical malpractice cause of action on their behalf against the VAMC and Waldron and the defendants accepted representation of the plaintiffs and in 2009, filed an administrative tort claim against the Department of Veteran Affairs, according to the suit.

The Robertsons claim the administrative tort claim was ultimately denied in November 2010 and in May 2011, the defendants then filed a lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs in federal court against the United States and under the Federal Torts Claim Act.

In December 2011, an answer was filed on behalf of the United States and a scheduling order was entered in February 2012, according to the suit. In accord with the order, the plaintiffs' expert witness disclosures were required to be made no later than Oct. 1, 2012.

The Robertsons claim the defendants failed to make the required expert disclosures and on Oct. 15, 2012, the United States moved for summary judgment based upon Rosinsky's failure to make the required expert witness disclosures in accord with the scheduling order.

Rosinsky did not object or respond to the summary judgment motion and the court entered an order on Nov. 13, 2012, directing Rosinsky to show cause by Nov. 23, 2012, why summary judgment should not be granted, according to the suit.

The Robertsons claim Rosinsky requested an extension, and it was granted to be done no later than Jan. 14, 2013, and once again, failed to make the required expert witness disclosures and the United States moved for summary judgment against and the case was dismissed on Feb. 20, 2013.

Despite the fact that Rosinsky had failed to properly prosecute the claim, the Robertsons were not advised of any of the pleadings or occurrences in the case, according to the suit.

The Robertsons claim they received a disengagement letter from Rosinsky stating that the case had been dismissed through no fault of Rosinsky and his law office.

The defendants failed to disclose to the Robertsons that the reason for the dismissal was Rosinsky's failure to disclose expert witnesses to support the plaintiffs' claims and the letter instead contained blatant falsehoods and misrepresentations regarding their claims and the lawsuit, according to the suit.

The Robertsons are seeking compensatory and punitive damages. They are being represented by Charles M. Johnstone II and David A. Dobson of Johnstone & Gabhart LLP.

The case is assigned to Circuit Judge F. Jane Hustead.

Cabell Circuit Court case number: 15-C-753

More News

The Record Network