We all do it: self-diagnose. Before we go to the doctor, we try to figure out on our own what condition we have and what may have caused it. Then we go to the doctor and share our findings. He asks us why we bothered coming to see him if we already knew what we had, and we tell him that we wanted a second opinion.
In the case of a gastrointestinal complaint, we naturally assume that it must have been something we ate. If we can’t can’t come up with a likely suspect, we start to wonder if we might have contracted a bug of some kind – maybe from the sniffling pizza delivery boy who dropped off a large supreme and bread-sticks last night.
Then, we remember that we’d just begun a new exercise regimen, after months of physical inactivity, and that the workout included a series of gut-wrenching stomach crunches. Aha! That’s it! Revenge of the abdominal muscles.
Anyway, as any doctor will tell you, self-diagnosis is a sketchy practice, especially if you’re planning to make it the basis of a court case.
Six years ago, Keziah Jordan filed suit against Murphy’s Deli in Houston, claiming that a “dubious-tasting kolache” she’d purchased there had within the hour precipitated severe gastric distress. Fortunately, Jordan was already at her doctor’s office at that point, where she allegedly collapsed from the pain.
Jordan’s doctor diagnosed viral gastroenteritis, noting in his records her complaint about the “dubious-tasting kolache.”
There you have it: an open-and-shut case.
A jury awarded her $400,000 and the deli owners appealed.
The First Court found that Jordan’s “evidence” was legally insufficient to sustain the verdict and remanded the case for a new trial.
Jordan will have another chance to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the kolache, and nothing but the kolache, was the source of her distress.