New York Verdicts

Find out about the most important recent New York cases, selected by VerdictSearch editors. Coverage includes Bronx, Kings, Queens, New York, Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester counties.

Subscribe to VerdictSearch for access to all New York verdictsPricing Options

Patient’s scar an accepted result of surgery, doctor claimed

Type:

Verdict-Defendant

State:

New York

Venue:

New York County

Court:

New York Supreme

Injury Type(s):

face/nose-facial laceration; face/nose-scar and/or disfigurement, face

Case Type:

Medical Malpractice – Surgical Error, Plastic Surgeon, Plastic Surgery, Cosmetic Surgery, Ear, Nose & Throat

Case Name:

Brian McBride v. Steven J. Pearlman, MD and Pearlman Aesthetic Surgery, P.C.,
No. 805260/14

Date:

October 20, 2017

Parties

Plaintiff(s):

Brian McBride (Male, 29 Years)

Plaintiff Attorney(s):

Anna Badalian;
Krentsel & Guzman LLP;
New York,
NY,
for
Brian McBride

Plaintiff Expert(s):

Roger Rose; M.D.; Otolaryngology; New York,
NY called by:
Anna Badalian

Defendant(s):

Steven J. Pearlman, 

Pearlman Aesthetic Surgery P.C.

Defense Attorney(s):

Paul M. Paley;
Garbarini & Scher, P.C.;
New York,
NY,
for
Steven J. Pearlman, Pearlman Aesthetic Surgery P.C.

Defendant Expert(s):

Norman Godfrey;
Plastic Surgery/Reconstructive Surgery;
Fresh Meadows,
NY called by:
Paul M. Paley ■ Robert Grant;
Plastic Surgery/Reconstructive Surgery;
New York,
NY called by:
Paul M. Paley

Insurer(s):

Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Co. for both defendants

Facts:

On Jan. 24, 2012, plaintiff Brian McBride, 29, a business’s owner, underwent a septorhinoplasty, which involved surgical revision of his nose and septum. The procedure was performed by Dr. Steven Pearlman. The surgery scarred McBride’s nose. McBride sued Pearlman and Pearlman’s practice, Pearlman Aesthetic Surgery P.C. McBride alleged that Pearlman failed to properly perform the septorhinoplasty, that Pearlman’s failure constituted malpractice, and that Pearlman’s practice was vicariously liable for Pearlman’s actions. McBride’s expert otolaryngologist noted that McBride’s injury is a result of a laceration of the exterior surface of the nose. The expert contended that a septorhinoplasty’s incisions are performed within the nose. He opined that McBride’s laceration was a result of a departure from an accepted standard of medical care. Defense counsel contended that McBride’s injury is a rare, accepted complication of the surgery that Pearlman performed. Pearlman claimed that the injury occurred while cartilage and skin were being lifted. He claimed that the maneuver is a necessary task that can cause a laceration.

Injury:

McBride suffered a laceration of the left side of his nose. The laceration was closed via application of sutures. McBride retains a scar of his nose. He claimed that the scar is noticeable and embarrassing. McBride sought recovery of a total of $2,025,000 for past medical expenses, past pain and suffering, and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel claimed that McBride’s scar covers merely 5 millimeters of skin. He contended that the scar is not easily noticed.

Result:

The jury rendered a defense verdict.

Trial Information:

Judge:

Joan A. Madden

Demand:

$250,000

Offer:

None

Trial Length:

5
 days

Trial Deliberations:

40
 minutes

Jury Vote:

6-0

Jury Composition:

1 male/ 5 female

Post Trial:

Justice Joan Madden denied plaintiff’s counsel’s oral motion to set aside the verdict.

Editor’s Comment:

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff’s and defense counsel.