A jury has awarded Wade McKenna, D.O., a Decatur, Texas-based board certified and fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon, $7.8 million in a lawsuit Dr. McKenna filed against his former business partner Neil H. Riordan, Ph.D.
Texas Doc Gets $7.8M Verdict After Partner Locks Him Out
1 min read Premium comments
Secondary#neilriodan#wademckenna
Dr. McKenna and Dr. Riordan together founded the South Lake, Texas-based Riordan-McKenna Institute. Dr. Riordan is a stem cell researcher and works in the field of cell biology. Dr. McKenna has developed stem cell application protocols, both surgical and non-surgical. The Riordan-McKenna Institute was a stem cell clinic that specialized in the treatment of acute and chronic orthopedic conditions.
A jury found that Dr. Riordan conspired to block Dr. McKenna from his ownership in the Riordan-McKenna Institute. Namely, Dr. Riordan locked Dr. McKenna out of the Riordan-McKenna Institute. Additionally, Dr. Riordan used Riordan-McKenna Institute assets to set up a competing clinic at the same location.
The clinic that Dr. Riordan opened and continues to operate is the “Riordan Medical Institute.” The Riordan Medical Institute has the same initials as the Riordan-McKenna Institute. It also uses stem cell therapy to treat orthopedic conditions.
Dr. McKenna sued Dr. Riordan for breach of fiduciary duty and the jury found in Dr. McKenna’s favor. The verdict included $5 million in punitive damages. At trial, Dr. McKenna was represented by Decatur, Texas-based law firm Boyd, Powers & Williamson and Fort Worth, Texas-based law firm Michael J. Henry. In a law firm press release, Boyd, Powers & Williamson noted that in reaching the verdict “jurors agreed that Dr. McKenna was not fairly compensated for those assets and for revenue generated by the competing business.”
Lead trial lawyer Derrick Boyd also commented, “This jury saw this case for what it was—an attempt by Dr. Riordan to use deception and fraud to take control of the clinic and all the good work that Dr. McKenna has done.”
React:
Discussion
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?
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.
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.