In a prior trial, Dr. Scott Bradley was found wholly liable for the injuries sustained by Gloria Pace following negligent rehabilitation after hip surgery in 2014. Pace’s estate was awarded $7 million…syracuse, Lawyer wants $1.5 million malpractice verdict vs. doctor tossed, says juror had serious conflicts, By Anne Hayes
Pace had been left with significant pain and injury but did not die as a result of the negligence.
Judge Robert Antonacci reduced the verdict to $1.5 million at the defense’s request. Pace’s husband rejected the lower amount and demanded a new trial to reassess the damages.
Last week, the jury in the second trial awarded Pace’s estate $1.55 million.
Now, Jordan Redavid, the attorney for the estate, is seeking to get that $1.55 million verdict thrown out because the jury foreperson failed to disclose her husband was a doctor who had been sued for malpractice four times. The juror was not named in the court papers filed by Redavid.
The woman’s husband has two pending malpractice litigations, Redavid wrote in court papers. Antonacci is the sitting judge for one of those cases.
The lawyer also noted two additional conflicts of interest for the juror.
Bradley and the juror’s husband both went to St. George’s University School of Medicine in Grenada and practiced at Upstate Community Hospital, Redavid said in the motion.
Redavid said the juror would have been removed from the jury if she had been honest in her juror questionnaire.
In his motion, Redavid said there is no way to “remove the taint” of having the juror on the panel in this case.
A low award in this case would “directly serve” her husband in his own litigation, he wrote.
Redavid also sais that the $1.55 million verdict being so close to the $1.5 million offer from the judge after the first trial was an “awful coincidence.”
In addition to a new trial, Redavid is seeking for the juror to be held in civil contempt and wants her to be held financially responsible for the costs associated with the trial.
Apart from the juror misconduct, the motion challenges the practice of allowing the defense in medical malpractice trials to withhold the identities of experts until they take the stand.
The defense is required to file their response to all of Redavid’s motions by April 2.