Court News Ohio
Court News Ohio
Court News Ohio

Court of Claims approves UTMC botched kidney transplant settlement for $650,000

Sarah Fudacz. v. University of Toledo Medical Center, Case No. 2013-00441

The mistaken disposal of a healthy donor kidney meant for the donor’s sister will cost the University of Toledo Medical Center $650,000, under a settlement approved by the Court of Claims of Ohio May 28.

According to a July 29, 2013 complaint, on August 10, 2012, UTMC threw away a “perfect match” kidney being donated by Paul Fudacz Jr. to his older sister, Sarah A. Fudacz, 24, who was suffering from end-stage renal disease.

The mix-up occurred after a nurse who wasn’t present for the surgery returned from a lunch break and disposed the contents of a slush machine that contained Paul’s kidney, according to the complaint.

“While the kidney was later recovered, it was deemed unusable because it was intermingled with other infected and/or non-sterile medical waste,” the complaint states.

Three months later, Sarah received a replacement kidney in Colorado. However, the complaint notes that this kidney is a “poorer match and of poorer quality” than her brother’s, and she may require another kidney transplant sooner than if the UTMC transplant had succeeded.

Among other claims, the Fudacz family sued the UTMC in the Court of Claims for its “gross negligence and recklessness,” for Sarah’s suffering “through additional painful dialysis,” and for Paul Jr.’s suffering “for having to undergo a painful and risky surgery, and for having to live the rest of his life with only one kidney, all in vain.”

The Court of Claims is given original jurisdiction to hear and determine all civil actions filed against the State of Ohio and its agencies.

To access information on other cases visit the Court of Claims website.

Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion, but only for noteworthy cases. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of court opinions. The full text of this and other court opinions are available online.