Opinion ID: 71979
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: findings regarding damage to krys's heart

Text: 65 Lufthansa argues that even if an emergency landing had been made along the North American coast Krys would still have sustained damage to his heart wall. Taking this point of error as a challenge to the fact finding that Mr. Krys sustained significant permanent injury to his heart as a direct result of the failure to land the aircraft at an available airport, 25 we review for clear error. 66 We take Lufthansa's argument to be that enough time would have elapsed during the execution of an unscheduled landing and transportation to a nearby hospital that whatever treatment Krys could have received could not have mitigated the damage done to his heart. We note that there was conflicting evidence in the record as to how much time would have been required to land the plane and get Krys to a hospital; similarly, precisely when the heart attack occurred was a matter of some debate. However, even assuming arguendo that appellant is correct in asserting that treatment could not have been administered for three hours after the heart attack, 26 we find no clear error. 67 Dr. Peter Segall, a Miami cardiologist and one of Leonard Krys's treating physicians, testified that if you are able to give thrombolytic therapy 27 within the first six hours after a myocardial infarction, you limit significantly the size of the amount of damage done, and the longer you wait, the less chance you have of helping. Dr. Segall testified more specifically that had [Krys] received thrombolytic therapy two to four hours after the onset of symptoms, he would have experienced significantly less damage than he did suffer. 28 Dr. Leonard Zwerling, also a Miami cardiologist and treating physician to Mr. Krys, testified, If he had been given thrombolytic therapy within the first few hours of his heart attack--the earlier the better, by the way--the chances are he would have a diminution, or lessened the size of the heart muscle damage. Responding to defense counsel's suggestion that the damage Mr. Krys's heart sustained was a result of the heart attack rather than the delay in treatment, Dr. Zwerling stated, It is a result potentially, [of] every delay, because the size of the damage might have been lessened if he received thrombolytic therapy earlier. Dr. Leonard Sommer, a Miami cardiologist who examined Mr. Krys, testified that within four to six hours after the onset of an infarction thrombolysis can diminish but probably not reverse completely a heart attack. 68 The magistrate judge's fact finding was supported by ample evidence.