$12M Verdict Stands in Connecticut Knee Surgery Death Case

A Connecticut man died shortly after undergoing a routine left knee replacement surgery performed by a surgeon affiliated with Orthopaedic Sports Specialists PC. Following the procedure, he began experiencing swelling and pain in his calf. When he returned for follow-up care, physician’s assistant Erik Libby assured him that the swelling was normal.

However, his condition worsened significantly. He was later hospitalized and died of a pulmonary thromboembolism, a condition his estate alleged began as a treatable blood clot that went undiagnosed. The decedent’s estate filed suit against the surgical group, alleging medical negligence in the failure to properly identify and treat the symptoms.

The case proceeded to trial, where a jury awarded $5.5 million for wrongful death and an additional $3 million for loss of consortium. With the inclusion of pre- and post-judgment interest, the total judgment has now surpassed $12 million.

The Appeals and the Expert Disputes

Orthopaedic Sports Specialists appealed the verdict, raising several arguments centered on trial court errors, particularly around expert testimony and witness examination. The group challenged the admissibility of statements made by plaintiff’s expert Dr. Richard Santore, who testified about what Libby should have done during the post-operative visit. The defense contended that there was no direct evidence the patient informed Libby about his symptoms. However, the appellate panel found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the jury to rely on circumstantial evidence—especially since the follow-up visit was specifically for evaluating leg swelling and the patient had reported those symptoms to family members.

The group also argued for a mistrial after the plaintiff’s attorney suggested that Libby’s deletion of a medical record might have been illegal. The court found the curative instruction—reminding the jury that Libby was not on trial—sufficient to mitigate any potential prejudice.

Another point of contention was the trial court’s limitation on the defense’s expert, Dr. Richard Iorio, who was expected to testify regarding the clot’s origin and size. The appellate court ruled that the objection was moot because the group only challenged one of the three independent grounds the trial court cited for restricting that testimony.

The Jury Instructions and Damages

Orthopaedic Sports Specialists also took issue with the trial court’s jury instructions, claiming they wrongly allowed jurors to award damages both for pain and suffering and for the death itself. The group cited model jury instructions suggesting that jurors must choose one category of damages, not both. The appellate panel rejected this reading, noting that model instructions serve as guidelines and are not binding legal standards. Moreover, under Connecticut law, damages for death can be awarded in addition to pain and suffering.

Even if the group’s argument had merit, the panel explained, the verdict would remain intact because the jury did not itemize the damages. Without a breakdown of the award, the court could not determine how the damages were allocated.

The Fight Over Compromise Interest

A significant portion of the final judgment stems from compromise interest, a mechanism under Connecticut law that imposes financial penalties when a defendant rejects a reasonable settlement offer and later loses at trial. In this case, the estate had extended a $1 million settlement offer before trial, which the defense rejected. As a result, the court awarded over $2.4 million in compromise interest.

The defense argued that the offer was invalid because it included an alternative proposal for a stipulated judgment. The appellate panel disagreed, concluding that a compromise offer may legally include such alternatives. “There is nothing in legal authority to suggest that an offer of compromise is invalid if it also includes an alternative offer to reach a stipulated judgment,” the court wrote.

The plaintiff’s side also appealed, seeking compromise interest on the loss of consortium claim. However, the court rejected this, holding that the offer was made solely on behalf of the estate, not in the plaintiff’s individual capacity. The court emphasized that it would be “untenable” to penalize the defense for not settling a claim that wasn’t clearly included in the offer.

The Law Firms Involved

The estate is represented by Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder PC. In a statement following the decision, the firm said the verdict represents “a commitment to prevent others from suffering the kind of medical negligence” involved in the case.

Orthopaedic Sports Specialists is represented by Heidell Pittoni Murphy & Bach LLP, with attorney David J. Robertson as lead counsel.

What’s Next?

With the appellate court upholding the full verdict, Orthopaedic Sports Specialists faces a final judgment in excess of $12 million. According to the plaintiff’s legal team, the next step will be recovering the full amount from the medical group’s insurer, Coverys, which allegedly refused to settle before trial. The case underscores not only the risks of failing to act on post-surgical symptoms but also the financial consequences of rejecting reasonable settlement offers in serious medical negligence cases.