Fortune-Ozoike v. Wal-Mart – Malpractice Causing Leg Amputation

Law books

In the evening of Boxing Day 2013, the Plaintiff Jameela Fortune-Ozoike went shopping at a Wal-Mart store with her sister. She slipped on a hanger that was on the floor and fell on the ground. She was in excruciating pain and was taken to Humber River Regional Hospital by ambulance.

Ms. Fortune-Ozoike was eventually diagnosed with a left knee dislocation.  By the following morning, the blood flow in her left leg was seriously compromised, and she was transferred on an urgent basis by air ambulance to St. Michael’s Hospital. There, she had vascular surgery in the early afternoon of December 27, 2013.  Unfortunately, this was too late to save Ms. Fortune-Ozoike’s leg and, on January 4, 2014, she received an above-knee amputation. 

The trial judge found that one of the Defendant physicians breached the standard of care when he assessed Ms. Fortune-Ozoike at 1 a.m. because he failed to: (a) conduct an examination for compartment syndrome, more specifically palpate the compartments in the patient’s left leg and passively stretch her muscles by moving her ankle; and (b) notify another physician of his concerns that Ms. Fortune-Ozoike might be developing compartment syndrome.

The trial judge further found after considering all the evidence of the experts that testified in this trial that had the diagnosis of compartment syndrome been made sooner, it is more likely than not that the Plaintiff would not have required an amputation of her leg.

Decision Date: January 16, 2023

Jurisdiction: Superior Court of Justice – Ontario

Citation:  Fortune-Ozoike v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp., 2023 ONSC 421 (CanLII)

Recent Posts

Image of Forceps

Noel v. Hawrylyshyn – Birth Injury Informed Consent Case Dismissed

On August 15, 2024, a birth injury medical malpractice lawsuit was dismissed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

The Plaintiffs alleged birth trauma resulting in neurodevelopmental limitations due to a lack of informed consent with respect to the use of forceps and vacuum to expedite the birth of the child. The Plaintiffs further alleged negligence with respect to the timeliness of a C-section while the fetus was in distress.

Read More »