Ala. Man's Penis Amputated by Mistake, Lawsuit Claims

By Brett Snider, Esq. on July 28, 2014 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

An Alabama man claims he woke up in a hospital to find that his penis had been amputated, but all he had wanted was a circumcision.

Johnny Lee Banks Jr., 56, has filed a lawsuit alleging that Princeton Baptist Medical Center in Birmingham never told him why it was "necessary to remove his penis," reports Reuters. A spokeswoman for the Center denied the merit of his claims, but by all accounts Banks is still missing his penis.

What recourse does Banks have for the allegedly mistaken mangling of his member?

A Bit Too Much Off the Top...

Banks' penis amputation lawsuit names several defendants: Princeton Baptist Medical Center, the Urology Centers of Alabama, the Simon-Williamson Clinic, and two doctors.

Along with the medical institutions, the doctors have insisted that Banks' circumcision-gone-wrong allegations are "completely untrue." Mike Florie, the attorney representing the two doctors, told that this suit is simply an "unfair attempt to damage the reputation of dedicated physicians and an outstanding clinic with claims that are completely false."

Whether or not the allegations are true, Banks has made some serious claims. A patient must typically give a medical professional informed consent for a procedure to be performed. There are legal exceptions for when doctors must perform emergency procedures, but it seems very unlikely that a penis amputation was such a life-saving procedure.

If Banks truly did only consent to a circumcision, and doctors had no informed consent for an amputation, this could be fertile ground for a malpractice suit. Surprisingly, these sorts of major medical mix-ups do happen, with patients having completely unnecessary procedures performed on them because of negligence.

Circumcision Smear Campaign?

Certainly the reputations of the doctors and the various medical institutions involved in Banks' case have been called into question because of the lawsuit. And given their insistence at the absolute falsity of Banks' claims, we have to wonder if this lawsuit doesn't have an ulterior motive.

Lawsuits filed for a malicious or fraudulent purpose can leave a plaintiff open to be sued for malicious prosecution or abuse of process. However, if there is some truth to Banks' allegations, the collateral damage to the defendants' names might just be too bad.

John P. Graves, Banks' attorney, told that his client is still waiting on medical records to "provide some explanation as to how and why this happened."

Follow FindLaw for Consumers on Facebook and Twitter (@FindLawConsumer).

Related Resources:

Copied to clipboard