LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/$1 Million of Justice for Dr. Menkowitz?
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

$1 Million of Justice for Dr. Menkowitz?

August 15, 2019 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

$1 Million of Justice for Dr. Menkowitz?
Seal of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania / Source: Wikipedia
Secondary#defamationbyimplication#elliottmenkowitz

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has reinstated an award of $1 million dollars in compensatory damages in a case that has been going on for over two decades—and is STILL not over yet.

In 1997, Pottstown Mercury Newspaper published a series of stories reporting that Elliott Menkowitz, M.D. had been suspended from Pottstown Memorial Medical Center and that his sudden absence had “spawned rampant rumors” of “professional misconduct in his treatment of an older female patient.”

Dr. Menkowitz sued the publisher of that paper and the reporter who wrote the story for defamation per se and defamation by implication.

A jury awarded Dr. Menkowitz $800,000 for past and future lost earnings, $200,000 for harm to his reputation, and $1 million in punitive damages.

Following post-trial motions, the trial court judge vacated the punitive damages award, ruling there was no evidence of malice, which is required for a punitive damages award.

Dr. Menkowitz appealed. On appeal, the Superior Court upheld the trial court’s ruling on punitive damages and also vacated the compensatory damages award.

Dr. Menkowitz appealed the Superior Court’s decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted allocatur, which meant that they would hear arguments on the limited question of whether the Superior Court failed to “apply the appropriate standards of causation and deference in vacating the judgment entered by the trial court awarding substantial compensatory and consequential damages to Elliot Menkowitz, M.D. for harm to reputation and loss of past and future earnings?”

A unanimous Pennsylvania Supreme Court concluded that the Superior Court had failed to give appropriate deference to the trial court as the factfinder. The Supreme Court found that the intermediate appellate court’s analysis had violated the Supreme Court’s holding in Joseph v. Scranton Times (Joseph III).

Advertisement

Writing for the court, Justice Christine Donahue stated that the appellate court overstepped its bounds by disregarding the evidence in the record that supported the jury’s verdict and instead pointed to contrary evidence to form its own conclusion.

This effectively reinstated the award of $800,000 for Dr. Menkowitz’s past and future lost earnings, $200,000 for harm to his reputation.

The case was remanded back to the Superior Court to address several issues that it did not examine in its original opinion.

For more OTW coverage of this case, see: After 22 Years, Penn Supreme Court to Hear Surgeon’s Appeal and After Two Decades Will Dr. Menkowitz Get Justice?

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy