Cherri Dawn Askrens v. Emily Marie Petersen, P.A.
What's This Case About?
Let’s talk about the time a woman went in for a routine checkup with leg pain, got a terrifying ultrasound result showing her arteries were basically shutting down, and then—get this—no one told her. Not the doctor. Not the clinic. Not even a Post-it note taped to her file. Months passed. No call. No follow-up. Just silence. And then, because blood flow is kind of important to, oh, not losing a limb, Cherri Dawn Askrens ended up having her right leg amputated above the knee. Now she’s suing, and honestly? We’re not even surprised.
Cherri, a 58-year-old Oklahoma resident with a history of diabetes, hypertension, and peripheral artery disease (or PAD, which basically means your arteries are clogged like a neglected kitchen sink), walked into Ochelata HC – Primary Care on March 6, 2024, worried about worsening leg pain. She’d had an ultrasound years earlier that showed severe blockages, but never followed up with a vascular surgeon—probably because, like the rest of us, she’s busy and healthcare is a maze. But this time, she was proactive. She told the provider, Emily Marie Petersen, P.A., that her legs hurt when she walked, that the pain was getting worse, and that she was worried. Petersen listened, did an exam, noted diminished pulses in her feet, and wrote down: “Claudication symptoms are worsening. Repeat Arterial US of bilateral lower extremities. Will likely place new referral to vascular surgeon pending these results. Patient is agreeable.” Sounds good, right? Action plan in motion. Except… it never moved.
The ultrasound happened five days later, on March 11. The results? Not just bad—catastrophic. The report stated “severe arterial occlusive disease in the bilateral lower extremities,” meaning blood flow was critically blocked in both legs. There was even a complete blockage in the mid-left superficial femoral artery. This is not “maybe take a walk later” territory. This is “your limbs are in danger” territory. And yet—here’s the part that makes us want to scream into a pillow—there’s no record that Cherri was ever told. Not that day. Not the next week. Not the next month.
She went back to the same health center on May 6 for an eye exam—still no mention of the ultrasound. Then again on May 30—crickets. Then, on June 3, she saw Petersen again for a routine follow-up. You’d think this would be a good time to say, “Hey, Cherri, your legs are basically on life support—let’s get you to a specialist!” But no. The visit note doesn’t mention the ultrasound. Doesn’t mention the PAD. Doesn’t mention the referral. It’s like the whole thing was erased. The medical equivalent of “never happened, lol.”
It wasn’t until four months later, on October 15—over seven months after the initial visit and nearly eight after the ultrasound—that Petersen finally referenced the results and sent a referral to vascular surgery marked “ASAP.” By then, the damage was done. Cherri’s condition had deteriorated. She ended up in the emergency room at Bailey Medical Center, then transferred to the Oklahoma Heart Institute, and ultimately underwent a right above-the-knee amputation. That’s not just life-altering. That’s life-rewriting. And it all happened after a cascade of silence, inaction, and what can only be described as a total breakdown in basic medical follow-up.
So why are we in court? Because Cherri isn’t just angry—she’s alleging negligence. Plain English version: her medical providers had a duty to treat her with the same level of care any reasonable professional would, and they failed. They ordered a test that showed a medical emergency, and then acted like it didn’t exist. That’s not just sloppy—it’s potentially malpractice. The lawsuit claims that Petersen and the mystery “Does 1-20” (which could be anyone from nurses to administrators to corporate owners of the clinic) failed to communicate critical results, failed to refer her in a timely manner, and failed to manage a known, high-risk condition in a patient with multiple comorbidities. And because of that failure, Cherri lost her leg.
But wait—there’s more. The suit also asks for punitive damages. And that’s the nuclear option. Actual damages (like medical bills and pain and suffering) are about compensation. Punitive damages? Those are about punishment. They’re the legal system’s way of saying, “What you did was so bad, we want to slap you hard enough that everyone else thinks twice before doing the same thing.” The filing alleges that the defendants’ conduct wasn’t just careless—it was reckless. That they ignored a known, severe risk. That they let a patient walk around for months with a ticking time bomb in her legs and did nothing. If proven, punitive damages could send a message. Or, more accurately, a bill.
Cherri is asking for $150,000 total—$75,000 in actual damages and another $75,000 in punitive. Now, is that a lot? For losing a leg? For a lifetime of prosthetics, physical therapy, emotional trauma, and reduced mobility? Honestly, it’s probably on the low end. Amputations cost hundreds of thousands over a lifetime. But this isn’t about getting rich. It’s about accountability. It’s about saying, “You had the information. You had the power to act. And you didn’t. And now I want answers—and yes, I want you to feel it a little, too.”
Here’s the wildest part: this wasn’t some rare, unpredictable tragedy. This was preventable. A patient with known vascular disease, worsening symptoms, and a confirmed severe blockage—this is Medical Malpractice 101. The system failed her at every step. The test was done. The results were clear. The next steps were obvious. And yet, no one picked up the phone. No one flagged the chart. No one said, “Hey, this woman might lose her leg if we don’t move.” It’s not like they missed a subtle sign. This was a flashing red siren, and the clinic treated it like a minor typo.
We’re not doctors. We’re entertainers, not lawyers. But even we know that when you’re told your arteries are shutting down, you don’t just file it under “meh” and move on to the next patient. And we’re not rooting for ambulance chasers or over-the-top payouts. But we are rooting for basic human decency. For systems that work. For clinics that don’t let life-or-limb test results vanish into the void. Cherri didn’t ask for this. She showed up, did her part, trusted the system. And the system ghosted her. That’s not just negligent. That’s unforgivable. And if this case does nothing else, we hope it makes every clinic in Oklahoma double-check their follow-up protocols—because no one should lose a leg just because someone forgot to hit “send” on a referral.
Case Overview
-
Cherri Dawn Askrens
individual
Rep: SMOLEN LAW, PLLC
- Emily Marie Petersen, P.A. business
- Does 1-20 business
| # | Cause of Action | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Negligence | Medical malpractice and negligence leading to amputation |
| 2 | Punitive Damages | Intentional and reckless conduct by defendants |