CVN screenshot of defense attorney Katherine Corcoran delivering her opening statement
Phoenix, AZ - An Arizona state court jury returned a defense verdict Friday in a medical malpractice lawsuit claiming the alleged failure of a gastroenterologist treating patients at a Banner Health hospital to diagnose a bowel obstruction caused a middle-aged man’s death, and the full trial was recorded gavel-to-gavel by Courtroom View Network.
The Maricopa County jury returned their verdict the day after hearing closing arguments in a trial that began on March 24. The family of decedent Johnny Ballard sought roughly $26.6 million in damages for his 2019 death, claiming Dr. Krishdeep Chadha should have ordered a CT scan with contrast dye to rule out an obstruction after Ballard was hospitalized with severe stomach pain.
Ballard’s attorneys maintained the decision to rely on a CT scan without contrast dye and to treat his worsening pain with heavy opiates fell below the standard of care, but Dr. Chadha’s attorneys successfully argued Ballard suffered from a rare complication of gastric bypass surgery called a volvulus that is extremely difficult to diagnose, and that without the benefit of hindsight Dr. Chadha acted properly based on the information available at the time.
Subscribers to CVN’s online trial video library get unlimited on-demand access to the full trial, including all witnesses and time-synced digital images of exhibits and demonstratives. Not a subscriber? Sign up today for a monthly or annual account and get access to this trial and hundreds more featuring many of the top civil trial attorneys from throughout the United States.
Attorney Brian Snyder of Snyder & Wenner PC, who represents the Ballard family, told CVN after the trial a restriction on using peremptory challenges to strike certain jurors presented him with a significant challenge.
“They said they could be fair during jury selection, so that left us without any options,” Snyder explained. “Discussions with them following the verdict cemented the fact that we never had a chance with those 2-3 people.”
Snyder expressed frustration that jurors told his team after the trial they liked their experts and presentation of evidence, but that didn’t translate into a favorable verdict.
“I think it was just an inherent mindset of theirs that we couldn’t shake,” he stated.
Snyder wouldn’t confirm whether or not he would pursue post-trial motions or an appeal but did cite “several substantive incorrect rulings” issued by Judge Susana Pineda.
“We are weighing all the options at this point,” he said.
Snyder confirmed the case went to verdict without a high/low agreement, noting he rejected a settlement offer from the defense he deemed “insufficient based on the liability and damages” without offering further details.
Attorneys for Dr. Chadha declined to comment when contacted by CVN.
Snyder attributed Ballard’s complex medical history and large number of medical providers to the jury’s reluctance to assign liability to Dr. Chadha, who relied on a CT scan without contrast dye ordered previously by another physician along with extensive bedside reports from nursing staff.
CVN screenshot of plaintiff attorney Brian Snyder delivering his closing argument
“What turned out to be the most difficult to overcome were the non-parties at fault,” Snyder explained. “We had settled with three of the providers prior to trial, and the defense spent a significant amount of time focusing on those prior defendants.”
Snyder characterized the verdict as a “gut punch” for the Ballard family but stressed they will “continue to persevere.”
Snyder also acknowledged the difficulty for plaintiff attorneys of taking a complex, 6-year-old malpractice case on contingency.
“Being a plaintiff’s med mal lawyer is not easy,” he said. “Our clients need our help, though, and losing cases is unfortunately just part of the process.”
He encouraged attorneys in similar situations not to judge their own success based solely on the merits of the case, citing unavoidable factors that ultimately can’t be controlled.
“It doesn’t make it easier or less gut-wrenching, but we have all won cases we should have lost, and we have all lost cases we should have won,” Snyder emphasized. “This one definitely fits in the latter category, but I know that we put on the best possible case we could have.”
Dr. Chadha is represented by Broening Oberg Woods & Wilson PC.
The case is captioned Ballard v. Krishdeep Chadha MD., case number CV2020-014913 in Maricopa County Superior Court.
Email David Siegel at dsiegel@cvn.com
