Complaint: Corbin v. Choice Podiatry, et al
STATE COURT of COBB COUNTY
STATE of GEORGIA
Richard C. Corbin,
Plaintiff
— versus —
Choice Podiatry Center, Inc.
Vivian C. Iwu, DPM, and
John/Jane Doe 1-10,
Defendants
Civil Action
File No. _________
Hon. ____________
COMPLAINT
SUMMARY OF THE CASE
1. This case arises from negligence in podiatric surgery by Dr. Vivian C. Iwu on Richard C. Corbin on October 14, 2022, and in Dr. Iwu’s follow-up care of Richard through April 6, 2023.
2. Pursuant to OCGA 9-11-9.1, Plaintiff attaches the Affidavit of Peter Bregman, DPM, as Exhibit 1.
3. Richard Corbin had bunions — bony growths — on the big and little toes of his right foot.
4. Bunions are an old, well-known problem. The podiatric industry knows how to handle bunions safely.
5. If bunions cause enough trouble for a patient, surgery may be needed to remove the bunions.
6. Bunion surgery may involve cutting off excess bony growth.
7. Bunion surgery may also involve cutting one or more bones of the affected toe and realigning the bones to correct the deformity.
8. If you cut bones of the toe, it’s important to make sure the severed pieces of bone get properly aligned and grow back together.
9. It’s bad to have the end of your toe disconnected from your foot, or connected but misaligned.
10. If the bones of the toe are cut and not reconnected, that can lead to several long-term problems, including instability of the toe joint, chronic pain, deformity, limited range of motion, arthritis, and difficulty walking.
11. If you do bunion surgery that involves cutting bones of a toe, proper surgical technique is important.
12. Proper surgical technique involves careful realignment and fixation of the bone segments.
13. Proper post-operative care is important, too — to make sure the severed ends of the bone are growing back together and are properly aligned.
14. Dr. Iwu performed bunion surgery on Richard.
15. Dr. Iwu cut bones of Richard’s toes.
16. Dr. Iwu did not use any hardware to fix the severed bones in place.
17. Over the subsequent months, Richard repeatedly reported that his big and little toes felt like they were not attached to his toes.
18. Dr. Iwu never investigated the problem.
19. Dr. Iwu never diagnosed “non-union” of Richard’s big or little toes.
20. Dr. Iwu never informed Richard of the need — or even possibility of — revision surgery to repair the non-union of his toes.
21. Eventually, Richard sought care for his foot elsewhere.
22. Dr. Errol Bailey at Resurgens Orthopaedics diagnosed the non-union of Richard’s toes.
23. Dr. Bailey performed a revision surgery to fix the toes.
24. By this time, however, the problem was more difficult to solve.
25. Richard ended up needing two revision surgeries, and his long-term prognosis was worse.
DEFENDANTS, JURISDICTION & VENUE
Defendant Choice Podiatry Center, Inc. (CPC)
26. Defendant Defendant Choice Podiatry Center, Inc. (CPC) may be served through its Registered Agent, Vivian Iwu at 540 Powder Springs Street, Suite B6, Marietta, GA, 30064.
27. CPC has been properly and timely served with this Complaint and a Summons.
28. CPC claims that its principal office address is 540 Powder Springs Street, Suite B6, Marietta, GA, 30064 in Cobb County.
29. CPC is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.
30. CPC is subject to the subject-matter jurisdiction of this Court in this case.
31. CPC is subject to venue in this county because its registered office is here, and also because the tort occurred here and CPC has an office and conducts business here.
32. CPC has been properly served with this Complaint.
33. CPC has no defense to this lawsuit based on undue delay in suing — whether based on the statute of limitations, the statute of repose, laches, or any similar theory.
34. CPC has no defense to this lawsuit based on undue delay in suing — whether based on the statute of limitations, the statute of repose, laches, or any similar theory.
Defendant Vivian Iwu, DPM
35. Defendant Vivian Iwu, DPM may be served at her place of business or at 2565 Winter Haven Ln, Marietta, GA 30062.
36. Dr. Iwu has been properly and timely served with this Complaint and a Summons.
37. Dr. Iwu is subject to the personal jurisdiction of this Court.
38. Dr. Iwu is subject to the subject-matter jurisdiction of this Court in this case.
39. Dr. Iwu is directly subject to venue in this county because he resides in this county.
40. Additionally, pursuant to OCGA 9-10-31, Dr. Iwu is subject to venue in this county because other joint tortfeasors are subject to venue here.
41. Dr. Iwu has been properly served with this Complaint.
42. Dr. Iwu has no defense to this lawsuit based on undue delay in suing — whether based on the statute of limitations, the statute of repose, laches, or any similar theory.
CAUSE OF ACTION: PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE
43. Dr. Iwu violated the standard of care in her treatment of Richard Corbin.
44. Dr. Iwu’s violations of the standard of care caused harm to Richard Corbin.
45. CPC is vicariously liable for Dr. Iwu’s professional malpractice.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
46. Plaintiff demands judgment in excess of $10,000.[1]
47. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a trial by jury and judgment against the Defendants as stated above, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
October 10, 2024
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Daniel E. Holloway
Georgia Bar No. 658026
DEH Law
2062 Promise Road, Unit 1305
Rapid City, SD 57701
404-670-6227
Attorney for Plaintiff
[1] This language is required by OCGA 9-11-8(2)(B), which also provides that “no further monetary amount shall be stated.”