$______ VERDICT INCLUDING $______ IN PUNITIVE DAMAGES - CIVIL RIGHTS - POLICE LIABILITY - WRONGFUL CONVICTION - PLAINTIFF ALLEGED HE WAS WRONGFULLY CONVICTED AND IMPRISONED FOR ALMOST 16 YEARS OF CRIME HE DID NOT COMMIT.

• Pages: 7-8

The plaintiff maintained that the defendant was negli-

gent in offering amputation before confirmation of di-

agnosis, proceeding with the amputation before

disclosing and discussing viable options, misleading

the plaintiff into thinking he had an aggressive cancer

that had to be addressed immediately without refer-

ring the plaintiff to specialists and failing to wait for

the pathology report before informing the plaintiff

how he should proceed. The plaintiff suffers from

phantom pain, disfigurement, scarring, and emo-

tional distress. The defendant denied that he

breached any standards of care and maintained

that amputation of the finger was required regardless

of either diagnosis.

The jury found that the defendant’s conduct fell be-

low applicable standards of medical care and that

his negligence was a factual cause of harming the

plaintiff. In addition, the jury found that the defendant

failed to obtain the plaintiffs informed consent prior to

the amputation and that had the plaintiff been prop-

erly informed it would have impacted his decision

whether to undergo the amputation. The jury

awarded the plaintiff damages of 1,200,000.

REFERENCE

Jonathan Jacoby vs. Peter Spohn, M.D. And Hazelton

Professional Services, DBA Lehigh Valley Physician

Group – Hazleton. Case no. 2018-09981; Judge Lesa

Gelb, 03-18-22.

Attorney for plaintiff: Melissa Scartelli of Scartelli

Olszewski, P.C. in Scranton, PA. Attorney for

defendant: Patrick Carey of Cipriani & Werner in

Lancaster, PA.

COMMENTARY

In Pennsylvania, “to obtain a patient’s informed consent doctors

must provide patients with “material information necessary to de-

termine whether to proceed with the surgical or operative proce-

dure or to remain in the present condition”. This information must

give the patient “a true understanding of the nature of the opera-

tion to be performed, the seriousness of it, the organs of the body

involved, the disease or the incapacity sought to be cure, and the

possible results.” The plaintiff argued that the defendant did not

get the fully informed consent of the plaintiff prior to the amputa-

tion and that the consent form failed to document the risk of re-

moving a normal non-cancerous finger and the reasonable and

viable option of waiting for a final determination of osteosarcoma.

In addition, the defendant failed to document the alternative of not

doing the surgery and there were no alternatives to the procedure

listed on the consent form.

$8,030,000 VERDICT INCLUDING $30,000 IN PUNITIVE DAMAGES – CIVIL RIGHTS –

POLICE LIABILITY – WRONGFUL CONVICTION – PLAINTIFF ALLEGED HE WAS

WRONGFULLY CONVICTED AND IMPRISONED FOR ALMOST 16 YEARS OF CRIME HE

DID NOT COMMIT.

U.S.D.C. - District of Massachusetts

In this matter, the plaintiff alleged that the

defendant city wrongfully convicted him and

imprisoned him for almost 16 years for a crime he

did not commit. The defendant denied the

allegations and disputed liability and damages.

The plaintiff was charged and convicted of breaking

into a woman’s bedroom, attacking her with a

wooden object and beating her. The defendant was

also a tenant in the same building and had a history

of drug offenses so he was on the defendant’s radar

and when another neighbor accused the plaintiff of

stealing his motorbike, the police used that informa-

tion as a lead into the woman’s attack. Then, the

plaintiff contended, the defendant’s police officers

fabricated evidence and testimony to charge and ul-

timately convict the plaintiff of the crime he did not

commit. The plaintiff was arrested and charged with

assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and

armed burglary.

Since the victim maintained that the room was dark

since she was awakened by the alleged attacked

and she described him as a white male with some-

thing wrapped around his head, the plaintiff con-

tended that the police were able to easily suggest to

the victim that the plaintiff was indeed the attacker

and have her positively identify him. The plaintiff was

convicted of the charges and sentenced to prison

where he remained for almost 16 years. He was con-

victed in 2002 and in 2016, with the help of the Com-

mittee for Public Counsel Services Innocence

Program, the plaintiff was able to overturn his convic-

tion by DNA evidence from shorts found at the scene

of the crime did not match the plaintiff’s DNA.

Thereafter, the plaintiff brought suit against the city

and the individual officers alleging wrongful convic-

tion and seeking compensatory and punitive dam-

ages. The defendants denied any wrongdoing and

disputed that any of the plaintiff’s allegations regard-

ing fabrication of evidence and conspiracy were

true.

At the conclusion of the 5-day trial, the jury deliber-

ated and returned its verdict in favor of the plaintiff

and against the defendant. The jury awarded the

sum of $8,000,000 in compensatory damages and

$30,000 in punitive damages.

REFERENCE

Natale Cosenza vs. City of Worcester. Case no. 4:18-

10936-TSH; Judge Timothy S. Hillman, 09-30-22.

SUMMARIES WITH TRIAL ANALYSIS 7

National Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

Subscribe Now