Episode 60
September 9, 2025
When Doctors Had “No Plan” to Save a Patient, with Sam Martin and Nathan Werksman
Episode Summary
“Have you seen this record?” Sam Martin asked trial partner Nathan Werksman. “This is unbelievable.” That record? “So far, there is no plan.” It became the theory of liability that the team leveraged against a surgeon whose 23-year-old patient died from abdominal compartment syndrome. Host Brendan Lupetin explores how the former Stanford Law School classmates navigated their case in a state where wrongful death damages are severely limited. Sam, an associate at Patrick Malone & Associates, and Nathan, a partner at Merson Law, combined their complementary skills—Sam’s meticulous case analysis and Nathan’s commanding trial presence—to secure a $2.3 million verdict.
Produced and Powered by LawPods.
Episode Preview
- In the case, a 23-year-old woman died from abdominal compartment syndrome after a feeding tube change, when doctors failed to perform a simple bedside test that could have saved her life.
- The case centered on a damning medical record entry stating “so far there is no plan” – documented hours before the patient died from a condition that the defense argued was easily treatable.
- Sam’s cross-examination destroyed the defense expert by exposing his refusal to acknowledge authoritative medical literature, getting him to admit he wasn’t an authority on the very condition he was testifying about.
- The team overcame challenges including the patient’s complex medical history, limited damages under New York wrongful death law, and evidence that the surgeon operated knowing his patient was likely brain dead.
- Nathan’s closing argument focused 97% on liability rather than damages, using compelling visual demonstrations like pounding his chest to show jurors what a 150 beats-per-minute heart rate actually feels like.
- The case demonstrates the power of “owning your weaknesses”: The attorneys never defended against the patient’s extensive medical history but instead used it to strengthen their argument about the need for proper care.
- Strategic use of New York’s unique expert disclosure rules allowed them to expose the defense’s refusal to admit medical literature as authoritative, creating the impression they were hiding damaging evidence from the jury.
Sam Martin
Subscribe to Just Verdicts Podcasts
Refer a Case
Fill out the form below to refer a case.