Flood v. Aluri-Vallabhaneni
70 A.3d 665
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2013Background
- Keisha Flood died after hospitalization in November 2006 following a small bowel obstruction with suspected sepsis; radiologist Aluri allegedly issued two reports but did not communicate results,
- Plaintiff James Flood, administrator of Keisha’s estate, sued St. Joseph’s and multiple treating physicians for medical malpractice; Aluri and Imaging were named as defendants in 2011, over four years after Keisha’s death,
- Trial proceedings included settlement/dismissals of several defendants; ultimately only Aluri faced trial,
- The trial court used a non-model interrogatories set focusing on deviation, risk increase, and substantial factor in causation; verdict favored Aluri,
- Appellate court affirmed, noting model interrogatories were flawed but not reversible error, and cross-appeal dismissed
- The court urged revisiting Model Civil Jury Charges to avoid relieving plaintiffs of proof on causation
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Propriety of using non-model jury interrogatories | Flood contends the court erred by abandoning Model 5.50E | Aluri argues deviations were harmless and interrogatories fit the case | No reversible error; interrogatories were not misleading given the charge |
| Whether substantial-factor causation was correctly instructed | Plaintiff argues Reynolds guidance was not properly followed | Defendant maintains the instruction tracked the Model Charge | Two-prong causation properly applied; substantial-factor guidance required, but error not reversible |
| Whether the verdict sheet improperly linked burdens on causation and apportionment | The sheet merged causation with apportionment improperly | Sheet reflected sequential burdens per Evers/Scafidi/Gardner | Not reversible; the charge and questions aligned with governing law |
| Cross-appeal on statute of limitations | N/A | Aluri/Imaging defense that claims expired | Cross-appeal dismissed; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Evers v. Dollinger, 95 N.J. 399 (New Jersey Supreme Court 1984) (causation in preexisting conditions; increased risk substantial factor)
- Scafidi v. Seiler, 119 N.J. 93 (New Jersey Supreme Court 1990) (two-prong causation; increased risk and substantial factor)
- Gardner v. Pawliw, 150 N.J. 359 (New Jersey Supreme Court 1997) (preexisting condition; burden shifted to show increased risk and substantial factor)
- Reynolds v. Gonzalez, 172 N.J. 266 (New Jersey Supreme Court 2002) (clarified substantial-factor instruction; need for proper model language)
- Verdicchio v. Ricca, 179 N.J. 1 (New Jersey Supreme Court 2004) (reaffirmed Reynolds; cautioned model interrogatories)
- Velazquez v. Jimenez, 336 N.J. Super. 10 (New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division 2000) (old form interrogatories; proximate cause not equated with damages split)
- Fosgate v. Corona, 66 N.J. 268 (New Jersey Supreme Court 1974) (damages apportionment; lost-chance framework)
- Dubak v. Burdette Mem’l Hosp., 233 N.J. Super. 441 (New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division 1989) (relationship between causation and apportionment)