Senior Trial Partner Robert Devine succeeded at trial in Supreme Court, Queens County, where a jury found that his client did not commit malpractice in the manner in which he performed two surgeries. However, the trial judge let the jury also decide another question of whether the doctor should have referred the patient to someone else rather than perform a procedure himself. The jury awarded $1,250,000.00 in past and future pain and suffering, and the trial judge set the verdict aside as against the weight of the evidence.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department agreed with Mr. Devine’s arguments and held that it was an error for the trial judge to order a new trial on that issue of whether to refer to a sub-specialist. In Previtera v Nath, 2018 NYSlipOp 05879, 2018 WL 399481 (2nd Dept 2018), the Appellate Division granted dismissal of the complaint, and threw out the jury’s award, finding that plaintiff’s expert’s theory was too speculative to make out a case, and ruled for the defendant doctor as a matter of law.
* Attorney advertising. Prior successful results do not guarantee a similar outcome.