In 2003, an Akron resident underwent her annual mammogram, which her radiologist deemed normal. One year later, she detected a sizable lump in her left breast, which was confirmed to be cancerous. The cancer spread to her lymph nodes, and she had to undergo chemotherapy and other treatments to destroy it.

Wednesday, her long journey through the courts took a material turn when the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in her medical malpractice lawsuit alleging radiology misdiagnosis that she can seek damages for emotional distress. The Court's ruling reverses that of the lower trial court and sends the case back for further consideration.

The woman claimed in her lawsuit that, had the doctor properly interpreted the radiology results, the cancer would not have spread and she would have been spared further medical treatments. In her case, those included a lumpectomy, radiation treatment and hormone therapy, in addition her chemotherapy. Multiple expert witnesses concurred with that view.

As to the emotional distress claim, the defendant had argued that a patient "must physically perceive" a disease's progression for it to be compensable as an injury, a claim the Court rejected.

"There is no requirement in Ohio that a physical injury ... cause pain or otherwise manifest itself so that the plaintiff is aware of its presence and deleterious effect at all times," wrote Justice Yvette McGee Brown.

The Court's ruling was unanimous and upheld an appeals court ruling on the same issue.

Related Resource: Columbus Dispatch, "Patient's lawsuit can add emotional distress" April 23, 2011