Former Philadelphia Eagles captain Chris Maragos was successful in his medical malpractice lawsuit for treatment of his knee injury.
Ortho Surgeon and Clinic Must Pay $43.5M to Former Eagles Captain
2 min read Premium comments
#chrismaragos#reconstructiveorthopaedicassociates#upmccommunitymedicine
The lawsuit was filed against the following: James Bradley, M.D.; UPMC Community Medicine, Inc., and Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates II, P.C. Dr. Bradley is an orthopedic surgeon based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, with an association to UPMC. UPMC is a health care provider and insurer, also based in Pittsburgh. Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates II is an affiliate of Rothman Orthopaedic Institute. Dr. Bradly is not affiliated with Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates.
A Philadelphia jury has found that the defendants must pay $43.5 million. Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates was found liable for 33% of the verdict.
The lawsuit stemmed from treatment that Maragos received after his right knee was injured during an NFL game in 2017. The injury was purportedly diagnosed as a torn right knee posterior cruciate ligament (PCL).
Two law firms, Meyers & Flowers and The Beasley Firm, represented Maragos at trial. Meyers & Flowers issued a press release on the verdict. Per the press release, the case “revolved around a meniscus tear that Maragos’ medical team failed to treat and the medically negligent decision to advance his rehab, further damaging the knee.”
The Meyers & Flowers press release came out shortly after the Superbowl. In the press release, Maragos commented, “On Sunday, my team played the Superbowl, and I could only watch and wonder whether I could have been out there with him [them] had I received proper medical care.”
Maragos continued, “While I live in constant pain and will never get back on the field, I hope this decision sends a message to teams’ medical staffs that players are people, not just contracts.”
The jury may have reached its verdict, but the matter is still ongoing. Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates has filed a number of motions for post-trial relief. Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates is asking for post-trial relief with regard to the jury’s verdict. According to court documents, Reconstructive Orthopaedic Associates is asking the court to “grant post-trial relief in the form of a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a new trial, a new trial on damages, or a substantial remittitur of the jury’s manifestly excessive verdict.”
OTW will continue to follow this matter.
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.