Attorneys: John Floyd, Sr., Summer Harcup

Plaintiff alleged a lumbar burst fracture and fraudulent record keeping on behalf of our defendant chiropractor. After a four-day trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.

Attorneys: John Floyd, Sr., John Floyd Jr.

This case arose from the defense of an orthodontist who allegedly negligently extracted the teeth of a minor child and failed to provide informed consent, resulting in need for dental implants and jaw surgery. Plaintiff had two subsequent treating providers testify against Defendant, but the jury still returned a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Teresita M. Baron, Maxwell J. Levine

Plaintiff alleged that our client, an orthopedic surgeon and upper extremity specialist, negligently performed surgery when he repaired Plaintiff’s severely comminuted distal radius fracture with a volar plate and screws. The Plaintiff alleged that our client improperly placed screws into the intra-articular joint space, and improperly set the wrist at the wrong angle, which necessitated a second surgery by a subsequent treating hand surgeon to remove the plate and screws and set the wrist at the proper angle. Plaintiff demanded almost $890,000, but the jury returned a defense verdict.

Attorneys: Richards "Dick" Ford, Patrick L. Mixson

The Plaintiff, the Estate of [the Decedent], claimed on behalf of his surviving spouse that the 57-year-old decedent died from a pulmonary embolism two days after an arthroscopic meniscectomy surgery performed by our client, an orthopedic surgeon, in December 2014. The Plaintiff claimed that our client failed to recognize that the patient was at high risk for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism after the procedure and should have received medication for prophylactic anticoagulation following the surgery. The Plaintiff relied upon the opinions of an orthopedic surgery expert for both standard of care and causation claims. The Defendants presented the testimony of an orthopedic surgery expert and hematology expert, both of whom rejected the notion that the patient was at high risk for DVT. The defense’s orthopedic surgery expert testified that it was not the standard of care to provide prophylactic anticoagulation medication. The Defendants’ hematology expert testified that the medication, if given, would not have prevented the Plaintiff’s death. The jury returned a defense verdict after seven days in trial.

Attorneys: John Floyd, Sr., Summer Harcup

This case involved allegations of dental malpractice arising from several extractions and root canals performed by our dentist in 2015. Plaintiff alleged that our dentist’s treatment required her to undergo substantial remedial care causing her to develop osteonecrosis of the jaw. Despite some challenging testimony from some of our client’s former employees, the jury still returned a complete defense verdict. 

Attorneys: T. Michael Kennedy, Maxwell J. Levine

Plaintiff alleged that he suffered a colon perforation during a colonoscopy, and alleged improper discharge, which lead to a 28-hour delay in diagnosis. The alleged delay in diagnosis to a more extensive and complicated surgical repair, resulting in increased risk of future medical complications. Plaintiff demanded policy limits to settle the claim early on and again a week before trial. Plaintiff asked for $500,000 in closing argument, but the jury returned a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Kurt M. Spengler, Melissa T. Woodward

Plaintiff claimed that our defendant chiropractor failed to properly diagnose and treat his foot injury and failed to refer him to an orthopedic specialist in a timely manner. Plaintiff demanded $1.3 million, but the jury found no negligence on the part of our client and returned a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Richards "Dick" Ford, Kurt M. Spengler

Plaintiff brought suit against his chiropractor after requiring spine surgery a few days after a chiropractic adjustment. Plaintiff called a chiropractic expert and the treating surgeon who performed the back surgery. They asked the jury for over $200,000 in damages. The jury rendered a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Ryan A. Hestbeck
Orlando partner Ryan Hestbeck recently prevailed in a wrongful death case pending in Osceola County, Florida, resulting in the entry of unopposed Summary Judgment in favor of our client. Ryan represented an Emergency Department physician in this case, which arose when Plaintiff presented to the ED for agitation, altered mental status, and manic state. Plaintiff had a complex medical history including psychiatric issues. On the day of the subject treatment, our client ordered sedation medication in the ED to address the patient’s combative state such that further medical testing could be administered. After admission to the hospital, the patient experienced a cardiac event that ultimately resulted in his death. Plaintiff’s surviving spouse, as the executor of his estate, sued our client, alleging that the sedation medications were administered without proper regard to the existing medical issues, and that but for the administration of these medications, her husband would not have died. Plaintiff’s retained Emergency Medicine expert agreed under oath that the administration of the medication at issue was appropriate under these circumstances, and further testified that he could not say there was a causal link between the administration of these medications in the ED and the subsequent cardiac event and death. In light of this testimony, Plaintiff’s counsel agreed to forego a hearing on summary judgment, and instead stipulated to entry of Summary Judgment in our client’s favor. Congratulations Ryan on this excellent work.

Attorneys: Adam W. Rhys, Amanda Ritucci, Darya Momeni
West Palm Beach partners Adam Rhys and Amanda Ritucci, and associate Darya Momeni, obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice case in Palm Beach County, Florida, this week. Plaintiff in this case alleged that our client, a CRNA, negligently discharged the Plaintiff following a cosmetic procedure performed at the plastic surgeon’s office. These allegations included that our client did not appreciate the Plaintiff’s compromised condition following the procedure while in the recovery room, failed to administer critical reversal medications and/or call 911, and failed to provide crucial information to EMS once they were called. As a result, Plaintiff claimed brain damage resulting in cognitive impairment, including loss of memory and function, headaches, and depression and anxiety. Defense of this case centered around the position that our client appropriately assessed the Plaintiff, who met the discharge criteria at the time but experienced a marked change in condition afterwards once at home. After a seven day trial, Plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury for $1 million. The jury deliberated for three hours before returning a complete defense verdict in our client’s favor. Congratulations to the entire team that worked on this file for this excellent result.

Attorneys: T. Michael Kennedy, Roxette Gonzalez
Miami partner T. Michael Kennedy and associate Roxette Gonzalez recently obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice trial in Miami-Dade County. Plaintiff in this case presented to our client for surgery to repair the first metatarsal phalangeal joint of his left great toe. During the surgery, our client podiatric surgeon discovered a condition that had not been visible on the pre-op films, and made the decision intra-operatively to remove Plaintiff’s tibial sesamoid bone as a remedy. Following the surgery, Plaintiff alleged that this decision caused him to experience excessive pain and toe drift, and required him to undergo a revision surgery to fuse the joint. He further claimed that the pain from the surgery and the subsequent revisions forced him to retire from his job as a professor five years earlier than he had originally planned. The defense presented evidence and expert testimony that all supported the theory that our client had not deviated from the standard of care, and that the intra-operative removal of the sesamoid bone was necessary; and also that the pain and toe drift the Plaintiff experienced was a natural result of the surgery itself and the underlying arthritis that necessitated the surgery in the first place. After a five day trial, Plaintiff asked the jury for $2 million in closing arguments. The jury found no negligence on the part of our client, and returned a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Nichole M. Koford, Tiffany Gatesh Fearing
We represented a trauma surgeon and his practice in this case, that arose from Plaintiff’s presentation to the hospital after a bicycle accident. Upon arrival to the ER, the trauma surgeon ordered multiple CT scans, including one for Plaintiff’s cervical spine. Although Plaintiff initially complained of numbness and tingling to his lower extremities and an inability to move his lower extremities, records demonstrated that during the progression of his ER presentation, Plaintiff was able to move all of his extremities, bear weight, and withdraw from pain. None of the objective assessments, including the CT scan of his cervical spine, showed any signs of an acute spinal cord injury. As a result, the trauma surgeon discharged the Plaintiff home with instructions to follow up if his symptoms worsened. Plaintiff never returned. Instead, eleven days later he walked into a different hospital reporting neck pain along with numbness and weakness of his lower extremities. An MRI at the second hospital demonstrated an acute spinal injury and Plaintiff underwent spinal surgery. Plaintiff filed suit against our client, alleging that the surgeon’s discharge of Plaintiff constituted a reckless disregard for the Plaintiff’s care and treatment and caused him to undergo spinal surgery that resulted in injuries including an inability to walk independently. During the course of the litigation, Plaintiff’s trauma surgery expert opined at deposition that our client did not act with reckless disregard or cause the injuries Plaintiff complained of. As a result, Plaintiff filed an Affidavit of an Emergency Medicine physician expert but this expert’s opinions were stricken by the Court because he was not in the same specialty as our Defendant. This case was in litigation for over six years, and during that time several good faith efforts to settle were rejected. As such, we moved for summary judgment, citing Plaintiff’s failure to provide any admissible expert opinions that showed our client breached the standard of care. The Court agreed, and summary judgment was granted.

Attorneys: John Floyd Jr.
Nashville Partner, John Floyd, Jr., obtained summary judgment in a medical malpractice matter in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. Plaintiff was a 54 year old woman under the care of our client, a foot and ankle surgeon, for a wound on her foot. Plaintiff became aware that her wound was not healing properly in the middle of October 2016. Although she documented the poor healing of the wound, she did not present back to the podiatrist’s office to have the wound reassessed until mid-November, almost three weeks later. At that time, it was determined that sepsis had set in, requiring amputation of Plaintiff’s right leg below the knee in November 2016. Plaintiff filed an initial Complaint against our client in February 2018, non-suited that Complaint in June 2018, and finally filed her Second Amended Complaint in October 2019. We moved for summary judgment, arguing that since Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint was filed a full three years after the cause of her injury, the statute of limitations for bringing such a claim had expired. The Court agreed, granting summary judgment in favor of our client and authorizing our client to seek fees and costs.