ShareThis Page
News

Veterans Affairs settles another Pittsburgh-area Legionnaire's lawsuit

| Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2015, 2:03 p.m.

A retired Army veteran and his wife have settled their Legionnaires' disease case against the Department of Veterans Affairs, one of the couple's lawyers said Wednesday.

“We were able to reach a good resolution with the United States,” Douglas Price said.

Gerald N. Caskey, 72, of Pine and his wife, Debra, stopped at the VA hospital in Oakland on Oct. 11, 2011, to get his prescriptions.

During the wait, Caskey washed his hands in a restroom and drank from a water fountain, Price said. Eight days later, he was in an emergency room and was subsequently diagnosed with Legionnaires' disease.

The lawsuit was at the deposition stage when the parties decided to see if they could reach an agreement, Price said. He declined to comment further.

A Justice Department spokeswoman confirmed the case was settled but offered no further comment.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said an outbreak of Legionnaires' disease occurred in facilities in the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System from February 2011 to November 2012. The CDC traced the problem to bacteria-contaminated water.

More than a dozen people have filed claims against the government. The outbreak sickened at least 22 patients at VA campuses in Oakland and O'Hara. Six of the patients died. The VA has settled at least 11 of the complaints.

Brian Bowling is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-325-4301.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me