As I have often written, large verdicts in malpractice cases make news, but the public rarely hears about what happens after the jury returns its verdict and goes home. There are always post-trial motions to overturn or reduce the verdict. If these are not successful, or even if they are, defendants will file appeals trying to get the verdict thrown out and a new trial granted. This was the plan of some Georgia malpractice defense lawyers and their insurance company client when the dentist they were representing was hit with a $10M verdict in a dental malpractice case. Things did not go exactly as planned.
It is rare for a dental malpractice verdict to result in a significant judgment. I have written about the elements most large verdicts have in common and very few of them are found in dental cases. Dental cases do not usually have huge medical bills that will have to be paid and do not usually have the same kind of catastrophic injuries that may prompt juries to award large sums. This Georgia dental malpractice case had some but not many of the usual features of a case that generates a large verdict.
The case involved a root canal procedure, which the patient claimed was botched when the dentist did not remove the tooth’s filling and used chemicals to kill the root, which left her with a permanent injury to the mandibular branch of the trigeminal nerve. The mandibular branch of the trigeminal nerve provides both sensory and motor function to the jaw, lower lip, part of the tongue, and chin. She alleged that, as a result of the malpractice, she suffered trigeminal neuralgia, an extremely painful condition, which feels like a sudden electric shock or a stabbing sensation. The pain can come on at any time day or night and may be triggered by seemingly innocuous events, such as drinking, talking, chewing, or even a light breeze on the cheek. There is no cure, but symptoms can be managed to some extent through the use of medications.
The dentist had a malpractice policy with limits of $1M. The attorneys for the patient demanded the limits. The dentist denied any malpractice and his insurance company offered only a minimal amount. The case was tried in DeKalb County, Georgia, which is just outside of Atlanta.
After the jury returned its verdict of $10M, the defendants filed the usual post-trial motions. Among the grounds they argued were that the judge made a mistake in instructing the jury and that a verdict of that size in a dental malpractice case was excessive. The judge apparently agreed and eight months later granted defendant’s motion for a new trial. Here is where things got interesting.
At the new trial, the plaintiff’s lawyers argued the negligence of the dentist and what they claimed were instances of him changing his testimony. The trial was a remarkably brief one with evidence taking only two days to present. While the jury was out, the insurance company offered $500,000 of the $1M policy limits. This time the jury returned a unanimous verdict of $50M. I am sure there were some long faces at the defense table.
As usual, there will be post-trial motions to overturn the verdict or at least reduce it greatly. If the judge thought $10M was excessive the first time around, she may be receptive to a defense argument that $50M is excessive in the extreme. I do not expect the verdict to withstand all of the challenges that will be presented. $50M is just too shocking a number.
While the eventual result of this case remains unclear, what is clear is that juries across the country are returning verdicts that are way above what they were doing only a few years ago. I am not sure what has caused this change, but it appears to be real and substantial. Stay tuned.
The post Be Careful What You Wish For appeared first on Sandweg & Ager PC.