Gary M. Samms

Secured a unanimous defense verdict on behalf of a cardiologist cardiologist who was accused of causing the death of a patient. The plaintiff contended the cardiologist should have immediately sent his patient to the hospital for an emergent cardiac catheterization due to unstable angina. Gary persuaded and convinced the jury that the patient indeed had stable angina and did not need urgent care, even though the patient died four days after the visit. (2024)

Secured a defense verdict on behalf of a gynecological surgeon facing accusations of damaging a woman’s ureters and urinary tract during a laparoscopic hysterectomy. The plaintiff claimed that the doctor’s alleged inexperience and negligence led to a transection of the ureter. Following the verdict, the jury emphasized that Gary’s cross-examination of the plaintiff’s experts played a pivotal role in the verdict. (2024)

Obtained a total dismissal of a hospital client after six days of trial. The matter involved allegations against the hospital for direct negligence and agency after a radical cystectomy, sepsis, perforation of the bowel and death. (2024)

Obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a urologist in a case involving testicular torsion. After a six-day trial the jury found the doctor was not liable for any injury sustained by the plaintiff. The key issue in the case revolved around presentation in the emergency room and the interpretation of an ultrasound as well as the presenting symptoms and complaints of the plaintiff. (2024)

Secured a unanimous defense verdict after a six-day trial on behalf of a primary care physician accused of failing to timely diagnose cancer. The unanimous verdict was reached after a thorough and aggressive cross-examination of experts. Gary persuaded the jury that the doctor’s actions were appropriate and that no CT screening was required for this patient despite their extensive smoking history. (2024)

After an 8-day trial regarding the death of a patient, Gary obtained a unanimous defense verdict on behalf of an interventional cardiologist. The plaintiff alleged the doctor was negligent in his interpretation of an echocardiogram and in the performance of a ventriculogram during a cardiac catheterization. Gary succeeded in presenting expert testimony from four different specialties to persuade the jury his client acted appropriately at all times. Aggressive cross-examination of plaintiffs' experts contributed greatly to the victory. (2023)

Secured a defense verdict after a nine-day trial where the jury found no liability for a primary care physician who was accused of making improper referrals to a weight loss physician and failing to work up a 36-year-old obese woman for cardiac issues. The decedent left behind a 4-year-old son and quadriplegic husband making the case extremely sympathetic. (2023)

Secured a unanimous defense verdict in Chester County on behalf of a podiatric surgeon after a six-day trial. Plaintiffs alleged the doctor failed to meet the standard of care by not closely observing a patient in follow-up post-surgery on a severe Charcot foot, allowing an infection that led to a below-the-knee amputation. The trial involved seven experts and complicated medicine regarding various infectious pathogens. (2023)

Secured a defense verdict for two anesthesiologists accused of malpractice. The plaintiffs had claimed the anesthesiologists failed to properly hydrate the patient during the procedure as well as adequately and appropriately monitor the blood pressure and heart rate. They were also criticized for extubating prior to the patient meeting the necessary criteria. The plaintiffs alleged the deficiencies resulted in poor perfusion to the bowel which led to necrosis and resection leaving the patient with short gut syndrome and cognitive deficits. The jury commented on the effective cross-examination and the quality of the defendants’ experts as being important in their analysis. Raymond Petruccelli was instrumental in the defense of this case. (2023)

Obtained a defense verdict for a lab director, hospital and health care system. Gary was asked to “parachute” in two weeks before trial and represent these health care providers. The complex case involved a lab mix-up that caused plaintiffs to have unnecessary surgery in the form of a radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. The surgery caused complications of stress urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. The plaintiff made an eight-figure demand and the trial lasted eight days. (2023)