Malpractice awards hit the jury jackpot

A tobacco case garnered the highest award last year, but three medical cases, all involving birth incidents, made the top 10.

By Tanya Albert, amednews staff. Feb. 3, 2003.

Three medical malpractice verdicts against physicians -- all awarded by New York juries -- made the nation's Top 10 Highest Jury Award list for 2002.

Medical malpractice cases have traditionally topped the annual list put together by Lawyers Weekly USA, a legal newspaper that tracks large verdicts. And this year, verdicts against physicians took the eighth, ninth and 10th spots on the list.

Topic: Liability crisis

"Medical malpractice cases are the only cases absent punitive damages to get up there," said lawyer Paul Martinek, Lawyers Weekly USA's publisher and editor in chief. "Usually it's the pain and suffering awards that push them up."

In 2002, juries awarded:

$94.5 million to a woman who prematurely delivered a baby with cerebral palsy. She claimed that the physicians failed to give her corticosteroids so the baby's lungs would mature faster. A Brooklyn, N.Y. jury decided the case, Perez v. St. John's Episcopal Hospital, in March.
$91 million to a 5-year-old girl with cerebral palsy whose lawyers said physicians delivered by cesarean section without realizing her mother was exhibiting symptoms of a rare condition and was not in labor. A Brooklyn jury decided the case, Wise v. McCalla, in December.
$80 million to a mother who delivered premature twins, one with cerebral palsy. The woman said physicians arrived late and didn't address her uterine cramping complaints. A Long Island, N.Y. jury decided the case, Brenner v. Spector, in October.

The Brenner case has since been settled for an undisclosed amount. The other cases are under appeal.

The awards aren't likely to be reduced, Martinek said. "For the most part awards are reduced because judges feel free to second-guess punitive damages. They are less likely to reduce awards in medical malpractice cases because they don't involve punitive damages, they involve pain and suffering." And pain and suffering awards are harder to second-guess.

The highest jury award in 2002 was reduced. A jury in Los Angeles awarded $28 billion to a 64-year-old woman who sued a cigarette maker, claiming it was responsible for her lung cancer. The judge reduced the award to $28 million.