Latest Personal Injury Verdict News from Oklahoma

Tulsa Jury Returns $15 Million Medical Malpractice Verdict for Child Left Disabled by Missed Bacterial Meningitis

A Tulsa County jury awarded $15 million on May 27, 2026, to the family of August Montgomery, a 7-year-old girl left permanently disabled after a pediatric emergency room physician discharged her at five months old without ordering a blood culture or administering antibiotics. The verdict came down in Tulsa County District Court before Judge Kevin Gray in Montgomery v. Katie Jackson, M.D., et al., a medical malpractice case alleging failure to diagnose and treat bacterial meningitis. The plaintiff family is represented by Jeffrey Rasansky of Rasansky | McKenzie Law in Dallas, along with Sharon Morgan and Natalie D'Antonio of Wais, Vogelstein, Forman, Koch & Norman LLC. The jury deliberated for roughly four hours before returning its decision.Case at a Glance Verdict: $15 million Case Type: Medical Malpractice (Failure to Diagnose) Court: Tulsa County District Court, Oklahoma Verdict Date: May 27, 2026 Plaintiff: August Montgomery (minor, through her family) Defendant: Katie Jackson, M.D., et al. Plaintiff Attorneys: Jeffrey Rasansky (Rasansky | McKenzie Law); Sharon Morgan and Natalie D'Antonio (Wais, Vogelstein, Forman, Koch & Norman LLC) Judge: Kevin GrayWhat Happened in the Emergency Room? In December 2018, August Montgomery was brought to a Tulsa-area emergency room as an infant for her third hospital visit in five days. According to evidence presented at trial, she arrived with fever, vomiting, lethargy, respiratory symptoms, and decreased urine output. Laboratory testing at that third visit showed elevated white blood cell counts, which the plaintiff's standard-of-care expert testified were textbook indicators of a serious bacterial infection. Court testimony indicated that the treating pediatric ER physician diagnosed August with a possible viral illness and discharged her without ordering a blood culture or starting antibiotics. Less than 48 hours later, she returned to the emergency room with seizures and partial paralysis. Doctors then identified bacterial meningitis, but the infection had already done permanent damage.The Liability Theory The plaintiff's case turned on a single decision point. As lead trial counsel framed it, "The labs were in the chart. And the path that would have prevented all of this, a blood culture and a single dose of antibiotics, was on the table, but was not chosen." Medical experts called by the plaintiffs testified that a single dose of ceftriaxone administered at the earlier ER visit would have sterilized the bloodstream within roughly two hours and prevented the meningitis from progressing. The defense argued that the presentation was consistent with a viral illness, but the jury sided with the plaintiffs after four hours of deliberation.What the $15 Million Verdict Covers The Tulsa County jury awarded the $15 million figure to compensate for future medical expenses and lost future earnings. August's injuries are catastrophic and lifelong: 44 days of initial hospitalization, including brain surgery and treatment for multiple strokes Permanent brain damage with partial paralysis and seizure disorder Cerebral palsy with severe cognitive delays Cochlear implants required for hearing At age 7, functioning at the developmental level of a 15- to 18-month-old In catastrophic pediatric injury cases like this one, the future-care component routinely drives the verdict figure. Life-care plans for children with this profile typically account for decades of nursing care, therapy, assistive technology, and medical equipment, in addition to lost earnings projected across what would otherwise have been a full working life.Why This Tulsa Medical Malpractice Verdict Matters for Plaintiff Practice For the plaintiff bar, the case is a clean illustration of how lab values in the chart can carry an ER misdiagnosis claim across the finish line even when the presentation looks ambiguous. The discharge decision was not made in the absence of data. It was made against the data. That distinction is what allowed the plaintiffs to frame the case around a single, concrete choice rather than a fuzzy disagreement about clinical judgment. It is also a reminder that pediatric ER cases involving missed sepsis or meningitis remain among the highest-value failure-to-diagnose categories, both because the damages are catastrophic and because juries respond strongly to evidence that warning signs were documented and overlooked. Oklahoma plaintiff attorneys tracking pediatric ER claims will recognize the pattern. Verdicts like this one belong on the public record where the plaintiff bar can find them. Major Verdict tracks significant plaintiff verdicts and settlements across all 50 states and gives plaintiff attorneys a free public profile to display their trial record. Create your profile and let your courtroom results speak for themselves.Frequently Asked Questions Q: What is the standard of care for suspected pediatric bacterial infection in the ER? When a young child presents with fever and elevated white blood cell counts, particularly on a repeat ER visit within days, the standard generally calls for further workup before discharge, which can include blood cultures, lumbar puncture, and empiric antibiotic coverage. The decision to discharge without these steps is fact-specific and is typically the central issue in a failure-to-diagnose meningitis case. Q: What is the statute of limitations for medical malpractice involving a minor in Oklahoma? Oklahoma's general medical malpractice statute of limitations is two years from discovery of the injury, but the limitations period for minors is tolled in certain circumstances. Parents pursuing a claim on behalf of an injured child should consult an Oklahoma-licensed attorney early, because procedural deadlines and notice requirements can vary depending on the defendant and the nature of the claim. Q: How are future damages calculated in catastrophic pediatric injury cases? Plaintiffs typically retain a life-care planner, an economist, and treating-physician experts to project the cost of decades of nursing care, therapy, medical equipment, assistive technology, and lost earning capacity. Those projections are reduced to present value and presented to the jury, which is why future medical and lost earnings categories often drive the bulk of the verdict in cases involving lifelong impairment.