Connecticut Jury Verdict in Genao Stroke Case
Table of Contents
Case Background
In early 2020, Francisco Genao, a Danbury resident, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit after suffering a debilitating stroke that he believed was preventable. He accused two doctors and a network of hospitals and medical groups of failing to recognize the seriousness of his artery disease and delaying surgery that could have saved him from permanent injury.
The case alleged negligence at multiple levels: poor decision-making by individual doctors, misinterpretation of crucial scans, and failure of hospital systems to enforce proper standards of care. The Defendants denied wrongdoing and said they had acted responsibly given the information available at the time.
Cause that led to the dispute
The lawsuit stemmed from years of treatment for blocked arteries in Genao’s neck. In April 2016, he went to Danbury Hospital with chest pain radiating into his arm. Tests showed that his right carotid artery was critically narrowed. Dr. Plummer, a vascular surgeon, examined him and concluded there was no immediate need for surgery. She recommended monitoring and routine follow-ups.
Over the following months, Genao returned for check-ups. In December 2016, he underwent a CT angiogram of his neck. Dr. Santoro, a radiologist, reported that the artery was about 60 percent blocked. According to the lawsuit, this interpretation played down the true level of narrowing and led Dr. Plummer to continue a conservative approach. She told Genao to return in a year.
In October 2017, Genao suffered a transient ischemic attack, often described as a mini-stroke. He went to Danbury Hospital, where doctors noted his condition but discharged him with instructions to return the following week for surgery. Three days later, before the planned operation, Genao suffered a full-blown stroke.
Injury
The October 2017 stroke changed Genao’s life forever. An MRI revealed damage to the brain’s frontal and parietal regions, and a later surgery uncovered severely ulcerated plaque in the artery. By then the damage was irreversible.
The stroke left Genao with memory loss, impaired balance, difficulty walking, and limited use of his left arm. Once independent, he now struggled with everyday activities. He required extensive rehabilitation, and even with therapy, he continued to face permanent physical and cognitive limitations.
Damages
Genao asked the court for compensation to cover his medical expenses, both past and future. He said the stroke forced him into costly rehabilitation programs and ongoing treatment that would last the rest of his life. Beyond the financial costs, the spoke of physical pain, emotional distress, and the frustration of losing his independence. He claimed the negligence robbed him of the ability to enjoy ordinary life, leaving him dependent on others and unable to return to the life he had before.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Francisco Genao
· Counsel for Plaintiffs: Paul A. Slager | Michael R. Kennedy | Nicole B. Coates
· Experts for Plaintiffs: Richard G. Bowman | Steven J. Shapiro | David C. Brewster | Marc R. Hamet | Babak Navi
Defendants: Dahlia Plummer | Joseph Santoro | Western Connecticut Medical Group, Inc | Western Connecticut Health Network, Inc | Nuvance Health, Inc | The Danbury Hospital | Danbury Radiological Associates, P.C | Specialty Imaging Associates, LLC
· Counsel for Defendants: Gretchen G. Randall | James B. Rosenblum |Aggie Cahill
· Expert for Defendants: William Zucconi | Neil Srivastava | Ali F. AbuRahma | Seemant Chaturvedi | David C. Brewster | Babak Navi
Claims Asserted
Genao’s legal team argued that Dr. Plummer and Dr. Santoro failed him at crucial moments. They said Dr. Plummer ignored obvious signs of worsening carotid artery disease and chose a wait-and-see approach when surgery was warranted. They accused Dr. Santoro of misreading the December 2016 scan, underestimating the degree of blockage and giving a false sense of security.
The claims went further than the individual doctors. The lawsuit alleged that Danbury Hospital and its parent companies bore responsibility for employing these doctors and allowing unsafe practices. According to the complaint, the hospital and affiliated groups failed to properly supervise staff, enforce medical standards, and ensure that patients received appropriate treatment. In the Plaintiff’s view, the negligence at both individual and institutional levels combined to create the conditions that caused his stroke.
Defense Arguments
The Defendants denied each allegation. Dr. Plummer argued that her decisions reflected accepted medical practice. At the time of her evaluations, she said, surgery was not clearly indicated, and monitoring was a safe, reasonable option. She maintained that she scheduled surgery promptly once the risk became clearer in October 2017.
Dr. Santoro defended his interpretation of the December 2016 scan. Radiology, he explained, involves professional judgment, and differences of opinion among experts are common. He insisted that his reading of the scan fell within a reasonable range and could not be considered negligent.
The hospital and its parent networks also rejected the claim of corporate liability. They argued that their systems and procedures met the required standards and that the doctors exercised independent medical judgment. They emphasized that Genao’s artery disease was complex, that strokes can occur unpredictably, and that the outcome, while tragic, did not prove that anyone acted negligently.
Jury Verdict
In March 2024, after hearing weeks of testimony and reviewing years of medical records, the jury delivered its decision. They ruled in favor of Danbury Radiological Associates, P.C. and against Francisco Genao. The verdict meant the jury did not find Dr. Santoro negligent in his reading of the 2016 scan.
The decision marked a turning point in the case. By clearing the radiology group, the jury weakened the foundation of Genao’s broader negligence claims. Without liability pinned on the radiologist, the argument that the hospital system and its doctors collectively failed him lost much of its force.
Court Documents