Arthur Brown v. Asima R. Chaudhary D.P.M. et al

On January 29, 2024, the New York jury returned the verdict in favor of Plaintiff Arthur Brown and awarded him $550,000 as compensation for damages suffered due to the podiatric malpractice incident that took place on July 1, 2014.

Case Background

On November 10, 2016, Plaintiff Arthur Brown filed a lawsuit alleging podiatric malpractice against Asima R. Chaudhry D.P.M, before the New York State, Bronx County, Supreme Court. Judge Alison Y. Tuitt presided over this case. [Case number: 27661/2016E]

Cause

Arthur Brown lived in Bronx County, New York. Asima R. Chaudhary, DPM, was a licensed podiatrist in New York. On June 28, 2013, and afterward, including July 1, 2014, Arthur Brown sought professional podiatric medical services from Asima R. Chaudhary.

On July 1, 2014, plaintiff Arthur Brown, 48, a bus driver, underwent arthroscopic ankle surgery after being injured at work.  Brown later experienced more issues with his ankle, such as arthritis. He filed a lawsuit against Chaudhry, claiming podiatric malpractice and negligence during the arthroscopy resulted in additional injury to his ankle.

Injury

As a result of the Defendant’s negligence, the Plaintiff suffered great pain, injury, and disability. Additionally, he endured hospitalization, mental anguish, and emotional distress. He became sick, sore, lame, and disabled. Further, he incurred hospital and medical expenses trying to cure or alleviate his injuries. Ultimately, these injuries left him damaged and unable to perform his usual duties and pursuits.

Damages

The Plaintiff demanded a judgment against the Defendant on all causes of action. This amount exceeded the jurisdictional limitations of all lower courts. Additionally, he sought the costs and disbursements of this action

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff:  Arthur Brown

Claims

Plaintiff alleged that Defendant had acted carelessly and negligently and deviated from the accepted standards of podiatric medical care in the professional community while providing podiatric treatment and services. Brown asserted that Chaudhry was tasked with repairing his anterior talofibular ligament but only eliminated scar tissue instead. Additionally, the plaintiff’s legal team argued that Chaudhry negligently omitted a stress test during the operation.

Defense

Defendant denied all allegations against her and asserted affirmative defenses against the claims of podiatric malpractice and negligence. Chaudhary’s lawyers contended that the ankle was stable and did not need a ligament repair. They also emphasized that the doctor was only authorized for worker’s compensation and had obtained Brown’s consent solely for an arthroscopy and synovectomy procedure.

Expert Testimony

During the trial, Plaintiff presented expert testimony from Edmond Provder and Steven Bernstein. In response, the Defendant called upon expert witnesses Devon Klein, Joseph Pessalano, and Michael Trepal to offer their expert testimonies.

Jury Verdict

On January 29, 2024, the New York jury found that Chaudhry breached the standard of care by not conducting a stress test on the ankle during the arthroscopy. However, they did not find her negligent for failing to repair the anterior talofibular ligament. As a result, they granted Brown $550,000 in damages. The jury awarded $275,000 for past suffering and loss of enjoyment of life and $275,000 for past loss of earnings as a result of the podiatric malpractice that occurred.

Following the verdict, the court granted Brown $4,125 in interest and $1,285 in costs. Therefore, a total judgment of $555,410 was entered on February 28, 2024.

Court Documents:

Available upon request