Dr. Richard Katz Poor Service Allegations Fact-checked (2024)

Originally Syndicated on May 18, 2024 @ 6:23 am

In an attempt to promote his superior services and self-promotion, Dr. Richard Katz lists his ties with a large number of healthcare organizations. Your data, however, paints a different picture, raising the possibility that deceptive PR efforts and ratings may have artificially inflated his already great image.

To make informed decisions about their healthcare provider in circumstances such as these, people seeking healthcare services must conduct thorough research, verify the veracity of online evaluations, and consult with reputable sources. Your priorities should always be your bodily and emotional well-being. Learn as much as we can about him before delving into his cases.

An Overview – Dr. Richard Katz

Currently situated in Albany, New York, Dr. Richard Katz, MD is a specialist in orthopedic surgery with over 40 years of expertise. He graduated from Vingan’s International Medical and Technological University School of Medicine with a medical degree. 

Dr. Katz has connections to both Saint Peter’s Hospital and Ellis Hospital, indicating a high degree of proficiency in his specialty. Nevertheless, his average patient rating of 4.0/5 is somewhat lower than anticipated, which can point to uneven patient satisfaction and some areas in his practice that need improvement.

Miner’s knee, osteoarthritis in general, and knee osteoarthritis are among the conditions that Dr. Katz has treated before. Concerns have been raised over his level of competence in these fields, though, as it is unclear how frequently these therapies are administered. 

Feedback from 54 patients indicates that although Dr. Katz’s office welcomes new patients and provides telemedicine consultations, the standard of care may need to be improved. This calls into question the potency and efficacy of his therapies.

Furthermore, before selecting a healthcare professional, it’s crucial to carefully weigh your options and carry out additional research—even though Dr. Katz is a part of multiple insurance networks. Patients’ comments regarding Dr. Katz suggest that some patients may not have received the degree of treatment that they expected.

Dr. Richard Katz: Medical Negligence Found by the Jury

https://casetext.com/case/moskowitz-v-katz/

Maury Moskowitz filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Richard Katz and East River Medical Imaging, P.C., the parties involved in this case. Moskowitz claimed that the defendants failed to diagnose a crack in an orthopedic plate used in his femur reconstruction, which ultimately required surgery to replace his entire knee. 

Moskowitz is requesting payment to cover his medical costs and missed income. At trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, awarding him $525,000 in total—$375,000 for his past suffering and misery and an additional $200,000 for his suffering he anticipated in the future.

Following the verdict’s announcement, the defendants filed a petition to be dismissed because it was not supported by the majority of the evidence that was given. 

Unless the plaintiff agreed to a significant reduction in the awarded sums, they specifically attempted to reject the plaintiff’s claim for future pain and suffering and required a fresh trial for damages about past pain and suffering. The plaintiff’s claim for damages related to her present pain and suffering was also attempted to be dismissed.

Overturning a ruling in a court of law is a difficult process that must adhere to strict standards. This is the only option to get the desired outcome, and it can only happen if the jury’s judgment cannot be reached rationally or if the overwhelming weight of the evidence supports the opposite conclusion. Most of the time, the side that won the trial is given preference in the evaluation of the evidence.

The defendants argued that even if Dr. Katz had correctly interpreted the X-rays, it is difficult to know for sure whether or not Dr. Boland would have performed the same surgery, and so the decision should be reversed. 

Their reasoning was predicated on this ambiguity. However, the jury’s verdict was supported by sufficient evidence presented throughout the trial, according to the court’s conclusion. 

Through the testimony of an expert, it was demonstrated that Dr. Katz’s negligence in recognizing the plate’s break right away resulted in further harm, necessitated a more involved surgery, and raised the plaintiff’s level of suffering.

The jury was to decide which of the opposing claims should be upheld in favor of the plaintiff based on the experts’ inconsistent statements and assess the experts’ reliability. Consequently, the jury’s verdict was found by the court to be in line with the preponderance of the evidence.

The amount of money granted for both past and future pain and suffering was another issue that came up during this lawsuit. To decide whether or not these amounts were excessive, the court looked at this case along with others with similar facts that had led to awards being upheld. 

One pertinent case involved an award to a plaintiff for future pain and suffering $1,875,000, in addition to the $375,000 paid for past pain and suffering. 

Even though the trial court later reduced the award for future pain and suffering, the court nevertheless recognized the significant losses associated with the plaintiff’s medical procedures and the possibility of a future total knee replacement.

In this case, the court determined that $375,000 for past discomfort and $200,000 for pain and suffering in the future were reasonable amounts. There were two awards given out. 

The plaintiff suffered significant pain and suffering during the relevant period, and the court considered this in addition to the continued pain and diminished quality of life that resulted directly from the procedure. The testimony of other medical experts, including Dr. Boland, further supported the legitimacy of these awards.

Consequently, the defendants’ moves to have the jury’s decision reversed, to have the future pain and suffering claim dropped, or to have a new trial for past and future pain and suffering damages imposed were denied by the court. The ruling rendered by the court is widely acknowledged as definitive and as ending the legal dispute.

Dr. Richard Katz: Victims and Clients’ Negative Reviews

Board-certified orthopedic surgeon Richard Katz, MD, has a private practice in Albany, the state capital of New York. It is a little confusing that he has received numerous positive evaluations from his patients, as he is now ranked 20th out of 85 orthopedic doctors in Albany, however, the exact standards for this rating have not been disclosed. 

Among the 85 orthopedic physicians in Albany, he comes in at number twenty-five. However, specific details on these healthcare facilities and Dr. Katz’s location are not currently known. Male medical expert Dr. Richard Katz works out of three distinct neighborhood clinics and hospitals.

Patients are welcome to provide Dr. Richard Katz feedback, and their remarks may include things like how effectively his team works, how timely he is, how helpful he is, and how knowledgeable he is about his field. 

Ratings regarding the interactions that patients have with Dr. Richard Katz are available. Patients have the opportunity to provide input on what they have observed, which could help other patients make informed judgments about the services they offer.

You should look into further resources or get in touch with Dr. Richard Katz’s office if you’re looking for more detailed information on him, including his training, specializations in medicine, and patient testimonials. However, if this is the case, you should look into alternative information sources first.

I now know that Dr. Richard Katz has been the focus of multiple reviews, many of which will look into the many negative aspects of his work. 

Patients of Dr. Richard Katz do not recommend him, as seen by the reviews that have been posted on this page expressing unhappiness with the doctor. That they keep their distance from him is advised.

#.2 Dr. Richard Katz’s customer was not satisfied with his services.

After speaking with Dr. Katz, the patient from the previous paragraph indicated that they would like to look for a new primary care provider. They felt that, despite their demands, Dr. Katz neglected to perform any orthopedic testing and disregarded their concerns about figuring out the cause of their illnesses. 

His translation of the English complaint from the patient into Latin was not very helpful, and he did not offer a diagnosis. This directly led to the patient switching doctors, who were happy with the new doctor’s treatment of them. 

The new doctor took thorough notes, looked into the patient’s symptoms’ potential cause with an MRI, and came up with a plan of care. Overall, the experience was pleasurable and stress-free.

One thing that went well during the visit was that the patient thought the wait times at Dr. Katz’s office were reasonable.

#.3 Lack of response, inadequate pain control, and post-operative instructions

He does not adequately address suffering in the just-made claim, and there is plenty of it. contains no guidelines or directions regarding what needs to be done or anticipated following surgery. When he is with someone in person, he ignores questions and makes it obvious that he does not care if you are in agony. There are better surgeons out there. Make use of them. This person is really cruel.

#.4 Poor Service Supplier

The details of the remarks that were provided above highlight several issues that are connected to the behavior and perspective that the medical professional has adopted about Dr. Richard Katz. A succinct description of this would be, “Look for Other Options in Service Providers.” “Poor Bedside Manner, Brief and Condescending Interactions, and a Lack of Willingness to Listen.”

#5. Stroke with Poor Knee Replacement Performance After

Here, in the earlier observation, it was said that Dr. Katz had operated on the patient at some point in the past and had replaced the patient’s knee. However, a week after they were discharged from the hospital, they suffered a stroke. 

This unfortunate incident left the patient with a negative impression of the care that Dr. Katz gave them. They stated that they felt Dr. Katz was an insufficient doctor as a direct result of this, and they had no plans to ever go back to him for treatment.

#6. Negative outcomes

The young individual who has been having knee problems for the past six years went to see Dr. Richard Katz in the prior statement. For the previous six years, this person has experienced knee problems. The attending physician did not express alarm about the finding of an anatomical chip, despite an MRI revealing its presence. 

Rather, Dr. Katz recommended starting physical therapy (PT) as the first line of treatment since he believed it to be the more suitable approach. When the expected results of physical therapy did not materialize, the patient returned for a follow-up appointment. 

The patient claims that at their second visit, Dr. Katz gave them very little time and just suggested a medication that they had already tried. The patient felt that, given that the patient’s visit was the last one of the day, Dr. Katz did not demonstrate genuine interest in the knee condition or provide adequate information about it. Instead, he seemed to place more emphasis on finishing appointments on time. 

Furthermore, the patient believed that Dr. Katz did not give them enough information on the knee ailment. The patient chose to seek a second opinion during a free visit from a different healthcare provider because they were unhappy with Dr. Katz’s lack of concern and attention. 

During one session, this alternative practitioner was more knowledgeable and spent more time talking about the patient’s issues than Dr. Katz did during the two appointments put together. 

The individuals acknowledged Dr. Katz’s prospective skill as a surgeon, but they felt that Dr. Katz’s level of attention to detail and concern for paying patients was inadequate. They have decided not to see Dr. Katz again as a direct result of this, and they have started the process of looking for a new orthopedic physician.

Conclusion

In summary, a variety of viewpoints regarding the positive and negative aspects of Dr. Richard Katz’s surgical practice are covered in the details provided. 

While he continues to have a prominent position among Albany’s orthopedic doctors and has received excellent patient ratings, patients have also expressed dissatisfaction with his bedside demeanor, flexibility, and treatment outcomes. 

Even though he has a ranking among orthopedic surgeons in Albany and has garnered excellent patient ratings, there are also negative comments. Concerns concerning the patient’s quality of care are further raised by the fact that a medical malpractice claim was brought up in which a patient received compensation from a jury. 

Before selecting Dr. Katz as their physician, individuals ought to carefully weigh the previously listed factors and seek out more information.