What do you think of when you hear that there's a sled running on biodiesel? Probably not thinking tractor pull sled are you? Unless you're a tractor pull fan. Well those big machines that the tractors and trucks pull are also diesel powered and in Jefferson City, MO there's a company that manufactures them and runs them on biodiesel.
The company is Bungart Motor Sports and I learned about if from Donnie Bungart.
Donnie says they do over 160 shows a year around the country. At the Midwest Extreme Truck and Tractor Pull in Jefferson City he says they had two sleds in operation. He says they run B20 in them and have been for over 3 years very successfully. Donnie says they've had a lot of luck locating the fuel when they need it, especially at major truck stops.
So if you're not a tractor pulling enthusiast you might ask, "What's a sled?" Donnie says it's a weight transfer machine. It starts out not weighing much but as the tractor pulls it more and more weight is transferred which ultimately stops the tractor. At least we hope! Thanks again to the United Soybean Board for inviting me out to the tractor pull.
You can listen to my interview with Donnie below:
Dr. Botches surgery: jury returns $17.25 million verdict.(Medical Law Case of the Month)
Medical Law’s Regan Report September 1, 2004 | Tammelleo, A. David CASE ON POINT: Durham v. Vinson, 2004 WL23769885 S.E.2d–SC.
ISSUE: The peer review privilege protects physicians from disclosure of information, which is the product of the peer review process. Public policy dictates that peer reviews should result in an objective review of the conduct of physicians. However, in this case, a plaintiff’s attorney elicited admissions as to whether or not a physician (whom his client had alleged was guilty of medical malpractice) had qualified to perform certain surgical procedures.
CASE FACTS: Nellie Durham was referred to Dr. David Vinson, Jr., for a surgical evaluation after being diagnosed with acid reflux and hiatal hernia. Dr. Vinson attempted to repair the hernia by performing a Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication (LNF)-an advanced form of laparoscopic surgery. During the LNF, Dr. Vinson did not “take down” the short gastric vessels, which would have prevented the repair from being “too tight.” Initially, the patient appeared to respond well to the surgery. However, she began to vomit and had trouble swallowing. An esophagram indicated that food particles were dispersed throughout the esophagus and that the esophagus was not completely clearing the barium used in the esophagram. As a result, Dr. Vinson performed an Esophageal Gastroduodenoscopy (EGD). During the EGD, the patient’s gag reflex was suppressed. It was not clear whether the patient aspirated during this procedure or during repair surgery. However, it was clear, that the patient aspirated while under the care of Dr. Vinson and that, most likely, the aspiration occurred during the EGD. Dr. Vinson performed a repair LNF surgery on the patient. During this surgery, Dr. Vinson “took down” the short gastric vessels. He also instructed Diane Hardy, Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA), to advance a dilator down the patient’ esophagus during surgery. The CRNA protested that it was “too tight” three times. However, she followed Dr. Vinson’s orders. As a result the esophagus was perforated. Dr. Vinson switched from preforming the procedure laparoscopically to performing an open procedure to repair the perforation. After the repair LNF surgery, the patient could not breath without mechanical assistance and was transferred to the hospital’s Critical Care Unit (CCU). Dr. Vinson informed the patient’s family that “everything had gone well” and that “She was only in the CCU as a precaution.” While the patient was in the CCU, the family requested that Dr. Vinson consult a pulmonologist. However, he did not do so. The patient’s family also requested that the patient be moved to Greenville Memorial Hospital, a better-equipped facility. However, Dr. Vinson advised against the transfer. Two days later, the family obtained a transfer order from a nurse. The patient entered Greenville Memorial Hospital and remained there for over two months. The patient’s family did not learn that the patient’s esophagus had been perforated until the patient was moved to Greenville Hospital. Her first month there was spent in the CCU. The patient developed adult respiratory distress syndrome and later, developed pulmonary fibrosis. The patient can walk for only very short distances and requires supplemental oxygen twenty-four hours a day. The patient brought suit for medical malpractice against Dr. Vinson. After the liability phase of a bifurcated trial, a jury found Dr. Vinson liable to the patient for $2,250,000 in actual damages. After finding Dr. Vinson’s conduct was willful, wanton, and in reckless disregard of the patient’s rights, the jury awarded the patient $15 million in punitive damages. Dr. Vinson filed post-trial motions. The trial court found that the jury’s award did not violate Dr. Vinson’s due process rights, but reduced the award for punitive damages to $8 million. Dr. Vinson appealed. go to web site greenville memorial hospital in our site greenville memorial hospital
COURT’S OPINION The Supreme Court of South Carolina affirmed the judgment in part and reversed it in part. The court held that any error that the trial court committed was harmless error, and that Dr. Vinson’s liability for the injuries to the patient was clear based on the uncontradicted evidence that Dr. Vinson committed a “gross breach” of the standard of care.
LEGAL COMMENTARY: Evidence of Dr. Vinson’s negligence was overwhelming. The breach of his duty of care to the patient was uncontradicted. Dr. Vinson’s liability was so clear that any error committed by the trial judge, other than in the punitive damage phase of the case, was “harmless error” and could not be used to justify a reversal of the judgment on the jury’s verdict on actual damages.
Tammelleo, A. David