A recent decision by the Ohio First District Court of Appeals addressed claims brought by several patients against a spine surgeon and his clinic, focusing on allegations that unnecessary surgeries were performed and that informed consent was lacking. The appellate ruling clarified key aspects of the case, including which damages are permitted and how settlements with other parties should affect final awards.
The complaint was filed by Sherri Puckett-Morrissette, Derrill Reynolds, Cheryl Wyatt, and Charles Wyatt in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas against Abubakar Atiq Durrani, M.D., Center for Advanced Spine Technologies, Inc., West Chester Hospital, LLC, UC Health, and Journey Lite of Cincinnati, LLC. The judgment entry on appeal is dated April 22, 2026.
According to the court document, each plaintiff underwent back or neck surgery performed by Dr. Durrani. Plaintiffs alleged these procedures were unnecessary. For example, Reynolds had prior back surgeries before seeing Dr. Durrani for lower back pain but received neck surgery instead; Wyatt sought treatment for lower back pain but later underwent cervical fusion at two levels rather than one as she believed would occur; Puckett-Morrissette had no prior back surgeries but suffered from Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and received a C1-C2 fusion after being diagnosed with instability related to her condition.
After a consolidated jury trial involving all three plaintiffs’ cases together, the jury found in favor of the plaintiffs on claims including negligence, lack of informed consent, battery, and fraud. Charles Wyatt also prevailed on a loss of consortium claim. The trial court awarded damages to each plaintiff and granted prejudgment interest after finding that plaintiffs made good faith efforts to settle their cases while Durrani did not.
Defendants appealed on several grounds: they argued that separate trials should have been held for each plaintiff; challenged evidentiary rulings regarding expert testimony; contested instructions given to the jury about Dr. Durrani’s absence; disputed awards for past and future medical expenses; sought setoff based on settlements with other defendants; and objected to prejudgment interest being awarded.
The appellate court rejected most arguments raised by Durrani and Center for Advanced Spine Technologies. On consolidation of trials, the court found no abuse of discretion since plaintiffs received similar treatments in overlapping areas of the spine and presented similar expert testimony: “the trial court did not abuse its discretion in consolidating plaintiffs’ cases for trial.” Regarding expert testimony from Drs. Wilkey and Saini—one an orthopedic surgeon/professor/clinician, another a radiologist—the panel ruled both were qualified under relevant rules.
However, on damages issues related to future medical expenses and setoff rights due to settlements with other tortfeasors (other defendants), the appeals panel sided with defendants in part. The opinion states: “while plaintiffs offered some expert testimony regarding expected future medical expenses, the testimony in each case was insufficient to support the jury’s respective awards.” As such, “the awards for future medical damages are vacated.”
On setoff rights—reducing liability by amounts already paid through settlements—the panel agreed with recent precedent allowing such reductions under Ohio law: “we similarly hold today that Durrani is entitled to a setoff.” The cause is remanded so that the trial court can determine appropriate setoff amounts.
Regarding prejudgment interest (additional compensation calculated from when harm occurred until judgment), defendants argued that plaintiffs failed to make good-faith settlement efforts. The appellate panel disagreed: “the trial court here did not abuse its discretion in finding that plaintiffs made good faith efforts to settle their cases,” noting evidence such as an oral settlement demand during trial compared with what was ultimately awarded at trial.
In conclusion: “Durrani’s first, second, and fourth assignments of error are overruled. The third assignment…is sustained as it relates to setoff and future medical expenses…The awards for future medical expenses are vacated…The judgments are affirmed in all other respects.”
Attorneys listed include Alan J. Statman (Statman Harris LLC) representing Sherri Puckett-Morrissette, Derrill Reynolds, Cheryl Wyatt, and Charles Wyatt; Philip D. Williamson, Aaron M. Herzig, Russell S. Sayre, Elise L. Marrinan (Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP) representing Abubakar Atiq Durrani M.D., and Center for Advanced Spine Technologies Inc.; case IDs referenced are C-250067/A-1601536 (Puckett-Morrissette), C-250069/A-1706444 (Reynolds), C-250276/A-1505970 (Wyatt).
Source: 2026Ohio1444_Puckett_Morrissette_v_Durrani_MD_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
