BENTON – U.S. Magistrate Judge Reona Daly chopped a knee injury suit down to a scraped leg on Oct. 29, after St. Louis surgeon Jeffrey Whiting recanted his opinion in the course of a deposition.
“The court is unwilling to find that Dr. Whiting’s initial opinion was based on sufficient facts and data and reliable principles and methods when Dr. Whiting was unwilling to conclude as such,” Daly wrote.
She granted summary judgment to Church’s Chicken on all injury claims of St. Clair County resident Annie Williams except a leg abrasion.
Her counsel Gary Mack of Belleville responded on Nov. 2, by pleading that the claim no longer meets a $75,000 minimum for federal jurisdiction.
He moved to remand it to St. Clair County, where he filed it in April 2020.
According to the complaint, Williams used the female restroom at Church’s on North Belt West in February 2019.
Mack wrote that the sink fell, “causing her to injure her left knee and other internal and external organs.”
Church’s removed the complaint to district court, asserting diverse citizenship as a Georgia business.
Church’s deposed Whiting this June, and moved to exclude him as an expert in July.
Representing Church’s, attorney Stephen Beimdiek of St. Louis wrote that Whiting first saw Williams for knee pain in 2016.
Beimdeck wrote that Whiting saw her in June 2019, after a magnetic resonance image showed arthritis and tearing of a ligament and a meniscus.
He wrote that she didn’t mention the sink to Whiting.
He wrote that Whiting performed replacement surgery in December 2019.
At the deposition, according to exchanges that Beimdiek quoted, Whiting’s opinion weakened even before Church’s counsel questioned him.
Mack asked Whiting if Williams had injuries to her ligament and meniscus, and Whiting said, “I don’t have any record of that.”
Mack asked if he formed an opinion of what caused her left knee injury.
Whiting referred to notes and he said, “It doesn’t say anything that she brought up the injury at that visit.”
Mack asked if the injury in February aggravated an existing condition, and Whiting said, “Correct.”
Mack asked what role the ligament and meniscus played in the replacement.
Whiting said, “It really wouldn’t change the procedure at all. We take the ACL out when we do the knee replacement.”
Mack asked if the fall in February aggravated her osteoarthritis.
Whiting said, “Definitely it can. It can aggravate arthritis.”
Church’s counsel established that Whiting didn’t know where the records he reviewed had come from, and didn’t know Williams had testified.
Counsel said, “If it’s clear that the vanity never hit her, would that affect your opinions in this case?”
Whiting said, “It would be just what I was told or read about the incident since I don’t have anything documented about it.”
Counsel said, “If the plaintiff has admitted or testified that she never fell down after this vanity fell, would that affect any opinions you’re giving in this case?”
Whiting said, “She still had arthritis and that’s what I was treating her for so I don’t think it would change my opinions too much.”
Counsel said, “You can’t say with any reasonable degree of medical certainty that plaintiff’s alleged incident at Church’s caused her any injuries, can you?”
Whiting said, “Correct, I was not informed of that.”
Beimdiek separately moved for summary judgment on all claims but abrasion.
Mack responded that Whiting connected Williams’s injuries to Church’s negligence, and that review of his deposition proved a genuine issue for trial.
Daly excluded Whiting, expressing concern over the soundness and care he used.
“At some point prior to his deposition, he reviewed some of plaintiff’s medical records, though it is not clear which ones,” Daly wrote.
She quoted his testimony that, “They were the ones given to me, I assume from – I don’t know. I had a box in my office.”
“After initially giving his opinion regarding the sink incident aggravating plaintiff’s osteoarthritis, Dr. Whiting recanted multiple times, ultimately stating that he could not given any opinion about plaintiff’s specific injury,” she wrote.
She found he didn’t treat Williams for any injury related to the incident and Williams never discussed the incident with him.
Her exclusion order set up an order for summary judgment.
“While a reasonable jury could find that the sink incident caused plaintiff to suffer an abrasion to her thigh, there is no genuine dispute regarding any other injuries to plaintiff resulting from the sink incident,” she wrote.
Mack’s motion to remand the case to St. Clair County stated that given Daly’s ruling, Williams would stipulate that her injuries do not exceed $75,000.