Supreme Court Reinstates $5.5M Award in Savino v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority

NCAJ filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff in Savino v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, on which the Supreme Court of North Carolina ruled on Sept. 25. Burton Craige, Trisha Pande, and Narendra Ghosh of Patterson Harkavy LLP wrote NCAJ’s amicus brief.

The Court of Appeals held that omissions in plaintiff’s complaint precluded trial on plaintiff’s theory of administrative negligence. It also set aside the jury award for non-economic damages, finding that plaintiff’s medical expert testimony was insufficient to support damages for pain and suffering.

After the Supreme Court granted discretionary review. NCAJ filed an amicus brief urging reinstatement of the jury verdict. First, NCAJ argued that the Court of Appeals decision departed from the modern standards for notice pleading when it held that omissions in plaintiff’s complaint precluded trial on a theory of administrative negligence. Second, it asserted that the Court of Appeals impermissibly usurped the fact-finding role of the jury when it re-weighed conflicting expert testimony on pain and suffering and found plaintiff’s evidence to be insufficient. 

In a 5-1 opinion written by Justice Hudson, the Supreme Court agreed with NCAJ on the pain and suffering issue, and reinstated the $5.5 million verdict for non-economic damages. The court further held that the Court of Appeals erred in failing to recognize that a claim for medical malpractice encompasses the theory of administrative negligence. Justice Newby dissented.  

Burton Craige, Trisha Pande, and Narendra Ghosh of Patterson Harkavy LLP wrote NCAJ’s amicus brief.