The Verdict Highlights Allegations of Negligence and Accountability in Complex Medical Procedures.
[New Brunswick, New Jersey] – November 22, 2024 –A Middlesex County jury awarded $3.16 million to Steven and Helen Rosen in a medical malpractice lawsuit that spotlighted critical issues in patient safety and surgical accountability. The six-week trial, presided over by Judge Joseph L. Rea, revealed conflicting narratives surrounding the surgical care Mr. Rosen received for his cervical spine condition.
Case Background
In May 2015, Dr. Rony Nazarian performed an initial cervical spine surgery to address a herniated disc in Steven Rosen’s neck. When Mr. Rosen continued to suffer from severe pain and a slow recovery, a second surgery was performed by Dr. Harshpal Singh in September 2015. During this operation, Dr. Singh reported observing significant damage to the C8 nerve root, an injury he attributed to Dr. Nazarian’s previous procedure. Dr. Singh’s co-surgeon, Dr. Bernard Newman, testified to observing the damaged nerve rootlets, which became a focal point of the trial.
The legal battle that ensued centered on whether the nerve damage occurred during Dr. Nazarian’s initial surgery as Dr. Singh reported to the plaintiffs or during Dr. Singh’s subsequent procedure.
Trial Highlights
The plaintiffs, represented by attorneys Bryan H. Mintz and Jeffrey Strauss of Mintz & Geftic LLC, alleged that negligence during one of the surgeries led to Mr. Rosen’s irreversible injuries. Because Mr. Rosen was under anesthesia, he had no way of identifying which surgeon caused the damage. The jury ultimately concluded that Dr. Singh was negligent in the September 2015 procedure, finding him responsible for the injury. Dr. Harshpal Singh, was represented by attorney Renee Sherman of Ruprecht Hart Ricciadulli & Sherman, LLP.
Ironically, since Dr. Singh (and his co-surgeon Dr. Newman) blamed Dr. Nazarian for damaging the nerve, the plaintiffs initially only sued Dr. Nazarian. It was not until Dr. Nazarian’s counsel, Greg Giordano of Lenox Law Firm, served reports from well-respected experts in the fields of orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, and intraoperative neuromonitoring, that Dr. Singh’s account came into doubt leading to his inclusion in the case. When Dr. Singh requested to be dismissed on the grounds of an expired statute of limitations, both the trial court and an early appellate court denied his motion. Dr. Singh is expected to file an appeal following this final judgment.
By placing the blame on Dr. Nazarian immediately after the September 2, 2015 surgery, Dr. Singh either didn’t realize that he was possibly the one who damaged the nerve, or more concerning, he actually deceived the plaintiffs, deflecting and misdirecting them to go after Dr. Nazarian in order to avoid his own culpability.
“Despite the apparent simplicity of the facts, a severely shredded major nerve root, the case was full of twists and turns that created a confusing picture focused upon who did what and when,” commented Jeffrey Strauss, co-counsel for the Rosens. “To unravel the knots created by the defendants, there were about 18 experts from around the country representing some top medical facilities and programs to present a picture to jury that would clear up any confusion. Our closing argument was most telling because it brought all the testimony and evidence together in a direct, well founded and straight forward presentation that allowed the jury after 6 weeks to see the simplicity that we saw when we started the case.”
Jury’s Decision and Broader Implications
Based on the jury’s verdict, and after applying relevant laws related to pre-existing conditions, the net award totaled $2,469,900.68, which includes pre-judgment interest, with post-judgment interest continuing to accrue.
Bryan H. Mintz, co-counsel for the Rosens, came away impressed by the jury, saying
“We are grateful for the jury’s thorough consideration of the evidence presented; the jury was laser focused with all jurors participating every day putting their own lives on hold to be part of the jury system. During jury selection, it was apparent that these jurors were highly intelligent, and many of them had advanced graduate level degrees”
A Call for Accountability in Medical Care
Reflecting on the case, Jeffrey Strauss emphasized the necessity of experienced legal representation for victims of medical malpractice, stating, “The technical and contested nature of these type of cases underscores the importance of retaining advocates with specific medical malpractice trial experience.”
The verdict marks a significant moment in a case that underscores the complexities of medical care, the level of trust placed in our medical professionals, and the serious ramifications that can arise from surgical procedures.
MINTZ & GEFTIC LAW FIRM
In addition to their expertise in medical malpractice, Mintz & Geftic is a top personal injury law firm in New Jersey. Bryan and his team specialize in representing the injured victims of car and truck accidents as well as work accidents.
Did you suffer injuries in a car accident or a truck accident in New Jersey.? Call us or text us today at 908-352-2323.
Did you suffer serious injuries in a work accident or have questions about workers’ compensation? Call the top NJ Accident and Workers’ Compensation Law Firm today.
All consultations with our attorneys are always free.
0
