Griffin, M.D. v. Synthes USA Sales, LLC
ORDER ON VERDICT, as set forth. Signed by Honorable Timothy L. Brooks on April 24, 2014. (lw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
FRANK M. GRIFFIN M.D.
Case No. 2:11-CV-02157
SYNTHES USA SALES, LLC
ORDER ON VERDICT
On the 23rd day of April, 2014, this matter came before the Court for trial to a duly qualified
and selected jury consisting of eight members. After two days of trial, the jury was instructed on
applicable law, and the case was submitted on a single interrogatory. The jury then retired to
deliberate and thereafter returned to open court to deliver a unanimous verdict, as follows:
Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that either of the following propositions has
That on or prior to September 28, 2006, Dr. Griffin became aware that he had sustained an
injury from the Synthes Bone Plate attached to his femur, including both the fact of his injury and
the probable causal connection between the injury and the Synthes Bone Plate;
That on or prior to September 28, 2006, Dr. Griffin, through the exercise of reasonable
diligence, should have discovered a probable causal connection between the injury he claims to have
suffered and the Synthes Bone Plate.
Answer (Yes or No):
The verdict form was signed and dated by the Jury Foreperson. Following the Court’s
reading of the verdict form in open court, Defendant requested that the jury be polled. The Court
then polled each juror individually as to the verdict, and all eight jurors were in agreement.
Accordingly, as the jury found in Plaintiff’s favor on Defendant’s statute of limitations defense, the
case will proceed to trial on the merits commencing June 23, 2014, as per the Court’s Order of
March 28, 2014 (Doc. 54).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 24th day of April, 2014.
/s/ Timothy L. Brooks
TIMOTHY L. BROOKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?