Setters v. Durrani
2020 Ohio 6859
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2020Background
- Dana Setters, who has Ehlers–Danlos syndrome, underwent cervical (C1–C2 fusion, Dec. 2012) and lumbar (hemilaminectomy/foraminotomy, Mar. 2013) surgeries by Dr. Abubakar Durrani; she experienced ongoing postoperative deformity, pain, and hardware removal.
- Setters and her husband sued Durrani and CAST (and initially West Chester Hospital LLC and UC Health); the hospitals later settled and were dismissed; trial against Durrani/CAST occurred in Nov. 2018.
- A jury found Durrani/CAST liable for negligence, lack of informed consent, and loss of consortium, awarding past medical expenses, future medical expenses, noneconomic damages, and consortium damages; the trial court reduced noneconomic damages to $500,000 and entered judgment of $849,906.
- On appeal defendants raised four principal issues: (1) admission of evidence of Durrani’s license revocations and prior lawsuits; (2) denial of JNOV/new trial (challenging sufficiency of evidence on catastrophic injury, future damages, conservative care, real-party-in-interest, cumulative error); (3) entitlement to setoff for prior hospital settlements under R.C. 2307.28; and (4) remittitur arguing certain awarded economic expenses should be treated as noneconomic for statutory caps.
- The First District affirmed most rulings but held admission of license revocations was an Evid.R.403 abuse of discretion (harmless error) and sustained defendants’ entitlement to setoff; remanded to apply the credit and recalculate damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Durrani’s license revocations/prior lawsuits | Evidence of revocations relevant to impeach Durrani’s credibility. | Revocations and prior suits unrelated to operative care, unfairly prejudicial under Evid.R.403. | Admission was an abuse of discretion under Evid.R.403 but harmless given other impeachment and evidence; not reversible. |
| Denial of JNOV / new trial (sufficiency on several subissues) | Evidence supported catastrophic "permanent and substantial physical deformity," nonsurgical future expenses, and breach for lack of conservative care; real-party-in-interest not an issue. | Errors and speculative evidence (future surgery), failure to show required conservative care, and plaintiff not real party in interest for paid bills. | De novo review: court affirmed denial of JNOV/new trial. Catastrophic deformity question properly submitted; future nonsurgical medical expenses supported; conservative-care breach supported; defendants waived real‑party defense; cumulative‑error claim failed. |
| Setoff for hospital settlements (R.C. 2307.28) | (Plaintiff) initially conceded setoff issue on appeal. | Nonsettling defendants entitled to setoff for settling defendants’ share of liability. | Appellant entitlement to setoff sustained; trial court reversed in part and case remanded to apply settlement credit and recalculate judgment. |
| Remittitur / classification of paid medical bills | Plaintiff: payments for medical care (regardless of payor) qualify as "economic loss" under R.C. 2323.43(H)(1)(b), so noneconomic cap not exceeded. | Defendants: because insurer paid past medical bills, plaintiff personally did not expend them and they should be treated to limit noneconomic recovery. | Court held statute’s plain language covers all expenditures for medical care regardless of payor; $149,906 awarded as economic damages stands; remittitur denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Grubb, 28 Ohio St.3d 199 (Ohio 1986) (motions in limine are tentative rulings; definitive on-record rulings preserve error).
- Oberlin v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., 91 Ohio St.3d 169 (Ohio 2001) (Evid.R.403 unfair prejudice standard and definition).
- Maurer v. State, 15 Ohio St.3d 239 (Ohio 1984) (appellate review standards for evidentiary abuse and prejudice).
- Posin v. A.B.C. Motor Court Hotel, Inc., 45 Ohio St.2d 271 (Ohio 1976) (standard for directed verdict / JNOV review).
- Galayda v. Lake Hosp. Sys., Inc., 71 Ohio St.3d 421 (Ohio 1994) (future medical expenses require reasonable certainty and evidentiary support).
- Arbino v. Johnson & Johnson, 116 Ohio St.3d 468 (Ohio 2007) (noneconomic damages are subjective; statutory caps and catastrophic‑injury framework).
- Hammerschmidt v. Mignogna, 115 Ohio App.3d 276 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996) (future damages speculative without evidence surgery will occur).
- Shealy v. Campbell, 20 Ohio St.3d 23 (Ohio 1985) (real‑party‑in‑interest rule and joinder purposes).