Although excessive verdicts against physicians and hospitals are often front page news, a verdict exonerating a physician who has been wrongfully accused of malpractice is seldom deemed newsworthy. Healthcare Underwriters Group of Florida, a physician-owned professional liability insurance company that has developed a reputation for aggressive defense, believes that the public also needs to know when a jury determines that a lawsuit against a physician has no merit.

Recently Healthcare Underwriters obtained a defense verdict for one of its physician members in a week-long trial in Miami-Dade County. The plaintiff in the case alleged that a well-respected local neurologist negligently failed to diagnose internal carotid stenosis in a patient who had presented with a history of a recent transient ischemic attack. It was undisputed that the carotid Doppler studies that the neurologist ordered demonstrated normal flow and that the patient exhibited no ongoing neurological symptoms. Two weeks after his discharge the patient suffered a middle cerebral artery stroke that left him with left-sided paralysis.

The plaintiff claimed in his lawsuit that the neurologist should have ordered further testing after the carotid studies proved negative and that those studies would have revealed the stenosis that he claimed was the cause of his stroke. The defense presented expert testimony that the plaintiff’s stroke was the result of a rupture of plaque from a non-operable lesion and that the work-up by the defendant neurologist was entirely appropriate. The defendant himself was an excellent witness who gave convincing testimony, even during cross-examination by the plaintiff’s lawyer.

Throughout the entire litigation process, Healthcare Underwriters maintained a strong defense posture in support of its insured physician. As is the case with all claims against physicians who are insured by this physician-owned company, the care was peer reviewed by a committee of practicing physicians. They determined based on the medical facts that the defendant physician had provided appropriate care and that the case should be defended to verdict. Accordingly, no offers were made to settle the case despite the severity of the claimed injuries and demands from the plaintiff’s lawyer for policy limits. During closing argument, the plaintiff’s attorney asked the jury to award more than four million dollars. Shortly after the case was submitted to them, a Miami jury of five women and one man returned a verdict in favor of the defendant neurologist. The Court ruled in favor of the defendant on all post trial motions and the plaintiff did not appeal. Michael Petruccelli, an attorney who has extensive experience defending physicians and hospitals, represented the defendant.