A Westmoreland County jury awarded $7.1 million in damages to Shane D. Steiner and his wife after finding that negligence by doctors and nurses at Westmoreland Hospital contributed to complications that culminated in the above-the-knee amputation of Steiner’s left leg. The verdict followed a seven-day medical malpractice trial centered on care Steiner received after a 2021 heart attack. Court records indicate Steiner was transported by ambulance to the hospital for urgent cardiac treatment, and the lawsuit focused on allegations involving a leg catheter that was incorrectly implanted and monitored. Although the jury returned a damages figure, the parties also reached a pre-verdict agreement during deliberations that limited the recoverable amount under specified terms.
Background and Allegations Over Post-Heart-Attack Care
Steiner, described by his attorney as a healthy 43-year-old father of three at the time, became ill on Thanksgiving Eve in 2021 after attending his son’s hockey practice at Kirk S. Nevin Arena in Greensburg. According to court records, he was taken by ambulance to Westmoreland Hospital for lifesaving heart treatment. The dispute focused on the care Steiner received after the heart attack, including whether the catheter was properly placed and monitored and whether the care met the applicable standard.
The lawsuit alleged that an incorrectly implanted and monitored leg catheter caused severe complications. Those complications, the plaintiffs contended, led to an eventual transfer to a Pittsburgh hospital, where Steiner’s left leg was amputated above the knee. Steiner and his wife pursued damages on the theory that the amputation was a preventable outcome tied to negligent care by hospital personnel, including both physicians and nursing staff. The plaintiffs were represented by Perry Calder Law, according to statements from Steiner’s counsel discussing the claims and the impact of the injury on family life.
The Seven-Day Trial and Competing Theories of Liability
After seven days of testimony and argument, the Westmoreland County jury found for Steiner and his wife, concluding that negligence occurred in the care provided at Westmoreland Hospital. The verdict addressed the malpractice allegations connected to the catheter’s placement and monitoring, which plaintiffs said contributed to the cascade of complications that ended with amputation. While the public description of the trial focused on the catheter-related events, the case was framed within the broader context of emergent cardiac care and the clinical risks that can follow a heart attack.
Westmoreland Hospital’s defense maintained that the doctors and nurses who treated Steiner were not negligent. In a pretrial filing, the hospital’s attorneys argued that Steiner suffered a very serious cardiac event and asserted that he had only a 20% chance of surviving. The defense position emphasized that Steiner’s survival was attributable to the efforts of the hospital staff, disputing that negligence occurred or that the care fell below professional standards. The jury ultimately sided with the plaintiffs on negligence, setting the stage for a substantial damages award subject to later limitation under the parties’ agreement.
Verdict, Damages Cap, and Post-Trial Positions
The jury’s verdict awarded $7.1 million in damages to Steiner and his wife. However, the final amount payable was constrained by a pre-verdict agreement reached during jury deliberations on Monday. Under that arrangement, the plaintiffs’ recovery was limited to an amount below what the jury determined Steiner should receive. The same agreement also provided a minimum payment to Steiner if the jury had ruled in favor of the hospital, establishing a negotiated floor and ceiling that would apply depending on the outcome.
Steiner’s attorney, Todd Bowlus, said the family was satisfied with the result while declining to disclose the specific terms of the cap. Hospital officials issued a statement indicating they would not comment on the specifics of the case, while also stating that they respect the jury’s decision and remain committed to providing safe, high-quality care to the communities they serve. Beyond the immediate parties, the dispute underscores how catheter management and postoperative monitoring can become focal points in malpractice litigation when complications occur after emergency cardiac treatment.
