Lee's lawyers point to Ritter's ominous vital signs and say Lee did not believe he had time to order more tests before taking him for a catheterization to remove possible blockages. They note that patients with chest pain are about 100 times more likely to be suffering a heart attack than an aortic dissection.
"I'm comfortable that a reasonable juror would understand that Dr. Lee was between a rock and a hard spot and had to make a judgment call," said John McCurdy, Lee's lawyer.
The family's lawsuit also calls into question the care Ritter received two years earlier, at another facility.
Although he believed himself to be in good health, his wife said, he had received a body scan at HealthScan America to look for abnormalities.
The plaintiffs say radiologist Lotysch should have noted that Ritter's aorta was enlarged then. Defense experts say it wasn't.
Lucrative contract
If a jury finds the doctors at fault, it will have to place a dollar value on Ritter's life.
At the time of his death, Ritter had a seven-year contract with Touchstone Studios that called for him to receive $75,000 per episode of "8 Simple Rules" in the first season -- with 5% raises every year. Assuming the series remained on air, he would have received up to $14.7 million, plus residuals.
Representatives for Ritter and Touchstone had started -- but not completed -- discussions on renegotiating the contract. A Touchstone executive said in a deposition that Ritter would have earned "between $250,000 to $350,000" per episode under a new contract and that he would have received a share of syndication profits.
That would equal at least $67 million if the show had lasted seven seasons.
Most malpractice plaintiffs never even come close to pressing such large claims. Damages for "pain and suffering" are limited to $250,000 in California. Typically, those who receive larger payouts can prove substantial economic damages, such as ongoing medical expenses or lost earning capacity.
Fraser says the Ritter family's claim is based on pure speculation. "They assume a very, very rosy scenario," Fraser said. "It might as well be $1 billion. Who could afford to pay a judgment like that?"
In any case, he said, "How many millions more do millionaires . . . need?"
Moses Lebovits, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said Ritter's wealth should not be an issue. "The role of the judicial system and the role of the jury is to do justice, regardless of the wealth of either side," he said.
Yasbeck said she knows the trial will provide a public airing of Ritter's health and potential wealth and attract plenty of media attention. She said she hopes it also will bring awareness to aortic diseases.
"It's never comfortable, but the idea of the awareness that this brings to the issue trumps that," she said. "My discomfort is nothing compared to people who are losing their family to aortic dissection. I can be uncomfortable for however long the trial goes. I'm ready."
--
charles.ornstein@latimes.com
