The Bell Law Firm's Lloyd Bell in closing arguments.
Lawrenceville, GA— Jurors Tuesday handed down an $18.3 million verdict against two physicians for the ultimately fatal heart attack a Georgia man suffered after undergoing surgery. Yarbrough v. Cardiovascular Group P.C., et al., 20-C-02832-S4.
The Gwinnett County (Georgia) State Court jury deliberated for roughly four hours before reaching its verdict at trial over the 2019 death of Ron Yarbrough, then 64. Yarbrough died a little over a month after suffering a heart attack while recovering from non-emergency colon surgery. Yarbrough’s family contends the surgeon that performed the procedure, Dr. Kota Venkatesh, and Yarbrough’s long-time cardiologist, Dr. Lance Friedland, are responsible, because they allegedly failed to properly address signs that Yarbrough may have suffered from critical heart issues.
Tuesday’s verdict, which includes $12 million for Yarbrough’s pain and suffering, apportioned 70 percent of fault to Friedland and 30 percent to Venkatesh.
Yarbrough had undergone CT calcium testing, which scans for calcium buildup in the coronary arteries, while under the care of cardiologist Friedland in 2018. And the six-day trial turned in part on whether Friedland should have done additional follow-up on the results from that screen, and whether surgeon Venkatesh, who knew Yarbrough was under the care of a cardiologist, should have sought a cardiac clearance before performing the non-emergency surgery.
During Monday’s closings, Huff Powell Bailey’s Daniel Huff walked jurors through Friedland’s care of Yarbrough. Huff told jurors that the CT calcium test results were not surprising and did not warrant additional testing, given Yarbrough’s host of health issues and ongoing treatment. And Huff noted that Friedland was never consulted on the risks of Yarbrough undergoing colon surgery.
“Everyone agrees: Mr. Yarbrough would not have had a heart attack, except that he went to surgery,” Huff said. “It was the surgery that led to the heart attack. And why is that important? Because it underscores Dr. Friedland’s care and treatment of Ron.”
And Venkatesh’s attorney, McGrew Miller Bomar & Bagley’s Heather Miller told jurors that, while Venkatesh ordered standard pre-operative screening, Yarbrough’s chronic medical conditions did not require specific cardiac clearance prior to surgery.
Miller noted Yarbrough had lived with high blood pressure, diabetes, and kidney disease for years, and that those issues were stable. Miller added Yarbrough had indicated to Venkatesh that he’d seen his cardiologist shortly before surgery and was not then suffering any problematic heart symptoms.
“For that patient, the standard of care does not require you to go back to a cardiologist,” Miller said. “Nor does it require you to contact a cardiologist.”
But the Yarbrough family’s attorney, Bell Law Firm’s Lloyd Bell, argued that Venkatesh violated the standard of care by failing to learn more about Yarbrough’s cardiac history, and why he was seeing a cardiologist, before performing the colon surgery.
And Bell told jurors that, months before that surgery, Friedland’s office incorrectly told Yarbrough his CT calcium test results showed no significant calcification in his coronary arteries, despite the CT score indicating otherwise. Bell added that Friedland failed to properly follow up on the combination of that elevated test result and heart-related symptoms, such as shortness of breath and chest tightness, that Yarbrough had complained of.
Appropriate follow-up, Bell said, would have found the dangerous blockages in Yarbrough’s arteries.
“This ticking time bomb, that was ticking away… would have been revealed if the doctors had followed the standard of care to evaluate this patient,” Bell said. “But… this ticking time bomb was not discovered.”
In an email after the verdict, Bell told CVN he believed the letter from Friedland’s office about Yarbrough’s CT calcium test results, and the defense’s argument concerning that letter, was a key in the case.
“I think the most impactful piece of evidence was the October 30 letter… wrongly stating, ‘no significant calcification in the arteries’ when the CT calcium report showed the high score,” Bell said. “Defense argued the letter was accurate ‘except for the word no’.”
CVN has reached out to attorneys for the defense and will update this article with their comments.
Email Arlin Crisco at acrisco@cvn.com.
Related Information
Not a subscriber?
Learn how you can access an unrivaled trial video library.
