Skip to main content

Latest Personal Injury Verdict News from Ohio

Browse all personal injury verdict news from Ohio.

Other useful Ohio links: Ohio personal injury resources for the public. Browse some of the most experienced injury attorneys in Ohio.

Medical Malpractice
Nursing home hallway

$10 Million Cincinnati Medical Malpractice Verdict in Good Samaritan Hospital Sepsis Death

A Hamilton County jury returned a unanimous $10 million medical malpractice verdict against TriHealth, Inc. on May 1, 2026. The verdict came in the death of 69-year-old grandmother Terri Price, who died of septic shock after sepsis treatment orders went unfilled in Good Samaritan Hospital's geriatric psychiatric unit. The Cincinnati case was tried by plaintiff attorneys Charlie Rittgers and Matt Nakajima of Rittgers Rittgers & Nakajima after nearly six years of litigation.Case at a Glance Verdict: $10,000,000 Case Type: Medical Malpractice / Wrongful Death Court: Hamilton County Common Pleas Court, Ohio Verdict Date: May 1, 2026 Plaintiff: Estate of Terri Price (represented by daughter Jennifer Wiesner) Defendant: TriHealth, Inc. / Good Samaritan Hospital Plaintiff Attorneys: Charlie Rittgers and Matt Nakajima, Rittgers Rittgers & NakajimaWhat Happened to Terri Price? Terri Price was a 69-year-old grandmother who, by her family's account, had been healthy and active until late March 2020. According to her daughter Jennifer Wiesner, Price began acting out of character that month, becoming confused and paranoid. The family initially suspected anxiety. On March 22, 2020, Price was admitted to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. Because UC Medical Center reportedly did not have an open bed, she was transferred to TriHealth's Good Samaritan Hospital. UC personnel sent Price with documentation noting an active infection and a diagnosis of "neurocognitive disorder due to a medical condition." At Good Samaritan, Price was placed in the geriatric psychiatric unit. Her family was not permitted to visit. Within six days, she was dead.Why the Jury Held Good Samaritan Liable for Medical Malpractice Court records and trial testimony indicate that Good Samaritan physicians ordered IV fluids, sepsis antibiotics, and potassium for Price as her condition declined. According to the plaintiffs, those orders sat unfulfilled hour after hour, with no nursing notes documenting why they were never administered. “These orders were placed, and Terri sat on the psychiatric unit for hour after hour without receiving the treatment these doctors ordered,” Rittgers told reporters after the verdict. "This care is some of the worst care I've seen in my career." Price suffered a perforated bowel, went into septic shock, and died on March 29, 2020. The plaintiffs argued that once a rapid-response event occurred, Price should have been moved out of the psychiatric unit and into a medical unit equipped to treat acute infection. She was not. The jury, which included three members with ties to the medical field, returned its verdict unanimously.What the Plaintiff Attorneys Argued Rittgers and Nakajima built the case around documentation gaps and a transfer-protocol breakdown. Physician orders existed, the medical condition was identified at intake, and the patient remained in a unit not staffed to manage acute sepsis. “It took six years for somebody to recognize that her mother should still be here today,” Rittgers said after the verdict, adding that the family hopes the result "brings positive changes to our health care system." For Charlie Rittgers, a trial lawyer with a record in both criminal defense and serious-injury cases, the verdict reinforced the weight of jury composition. "The fact that they understood the egregiousness of this care and signified what was taken, the verdict does mean more," he said.What the $10 Million Verdict Means for Ohio Hospitals TriHealth, the hospital system that operates Good Samaritan, issued a statement saying it was "deeply disappointed" with the verdict and is considering an appeal. Spokesman Thomas Lange said the organization believes "the jury's verdict is not consistent with the high quality of care provided at Good Samaritan Hospital." For the Price family, the result is about more than the dollar figure. Wiesner has called for hospital policy changes, specifically a requirement that psychiatric-unit patients be transferred to medical care the moment a medical emergency is identified. The verdict adds to a growing body of Ohio wrongful death and medical malpractice verdicts involving documentation failures and inter-unit transfer protocols. It also lands in a year when Cincinnati-area medical malpractice verdicts have drawn renewed attention from the plaintiff bar across Hamilton County. If you or someone you love has been seriously injured by a hospital error, verdicts like this one show what juries are willing to award when the evidence is well-documented and the trial team is prepared. Find a plaintiff lawyer in Ohio on Major Verdict who has the trial record to back it up.Frequently Asked Questions Q: What types of damages can an Ohio family recover in a wrongful death medical malpractice case? Ohio wrongful death claims allow recovery for the survivors' loss of support, services, society, and companionship, as well as the deceased's mental anguish. Compensatory damages for non-economic losses in medical malpractice cases are subject to statutory caps in Ohio, though those caps do not apply to claims involving catastrophic injury or wrongful death in every circumstance. The Price verdict was reported as a single $10 million figure without a public breakdown between economic and non-economic damages. Q: Can TriHealth appeal the $10 million verdict? Yes. TriHealth has publicly stated it is considering an appeal of the May 1, 2026 verdict. In Ohio, a defendant typically has 30 days from the entry of judgment to file a notice of appeal. Hamilton County appeals go to the Ohio First District Court of Appeals. An appeal does not automatically reverse a jury verdict, and most appeals are decided on procedural or evidentiary grounds rather than re-weighing the facts. Q: How long do families have to file a medical malpractice lawsuit in Ohio? Ohio's medical malpractice statute of limitations is generally one year from the date the cause of action accrues. A four-year statute of repose bars most claims filed more than four years after the alleged negligent act. Wrongful death claims have their own two-year statute of limitations that runs from the date of death. Families who believe a hospital error caused a loved one's death should consult an Ohio plaintiff attorney as soon as possible because these deadlines are short and strictly enforced.

Wrongful Death

$22 Million Ohio Wrongful Death Verdict - Jury Finds Work From Home Denial Led to Newborn's Death

A Hamilton County, Ohio jury has returned a $22 million verdict against Total Quality Logistics (TQL), one of the largest freight brokerage companies in the United States, in a wrongful death lawsuit stemming from the death of a newborn. Jurors found that TQL's refusal to allow a pregnant, high-risk employee to work from home, as directed by her physician, set off a chain of events that ended with the death of baby Magnolia just hours after birth.What the Jury Found According to attorneys for the plaintiff, the jury concluded that TQL bore responsibility for the death of the newborn after the company initially denied a medically supported accommodation request. The plaintiff, identified by last name as Walsh, underwent a procedure in February 2021 related to her pregnancy and was classified as high-risk. Her doctors placed her on modified bed rest and directed her to work from home. TQL denied that request. A third party eventually intervened, and the work-from-home accommodation was granted. But by then, according to the plaintiff's legal team, the damage had been done.A Timeline With Tragic Consequences On February 24, Walsh experienced complications and was admitted to the hospital. She gave birth to baby Magnolia at 20 weeks and six days of gestation. The infant died several hours after birth. The lawsuit argued that the delayed approval of the accommodation request directly contributed to those complications and ultimately to Magnolia's death. The case drew attention to the intersection of workplace accommodation law, pregnancy protections, and employer duty of care for employees with high-risk medical conditions.TQL's Response TQL issued a statement following the verdict, expressing condolences to the Walsh family while disputing the jury's findings. "We extend our condolences to the Walsh family. We disagree with the verdict and the way the facts were characterized at trial. We are evaluating legal options and remain committed to supporting the health and well-being of our employees," a company spokeswoman said. TQL is evaluating legal options, which means the verdict could be subject to post-trial motions or appeal. The $22 million award should be considered in that context.The Broader Significance This verdict arrives at a moment of heightened public attention to pregnancy-related workplace rights. Federal law, including the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which took effect in 2023, requires covered employers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. While this case arose from events in 2021, it reflects ongoing litigation over how employers handle accommodation requests from pregnant workers, particularly those classified as high-risk by their physicians. A $22 million verdict in a case like this sends a signal about how Ohio juries view an employer's obligation to act when a doctor has issued explicit instructions and an employee's health, and the health of her unborn child, is at stake.What This Verdict Means for Plaintiff Attorneys Cases involving pregnancy accommodation denials and resulting harm have become an active area of plaintiff litigation. The theory of liability here, that a delayed or denied accommodation directly caused a medical crisis and the death of a newborn, required the jury to connect corporate policy to a deeply personal tragedy. For plaintiff lawyers tracking verdict trends in employment and wrongful death litigation, this case illustrates how Ohio juries are willing to hold large employers accountable when medical accommodations are not handled with urgency. Attorneys who handle cases involving pregnancy discrimination, wrongful death, or employer negligence can display results like this on their Major Verdict profile, giving prospective clients and referring attorneys a clear picture of their track record at trial. Join Major Verdict to create your profile and start showcasing your results.


Member Search

Latest Featured Members

View All Major Verdict Members
Search Members by State
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6 Sample 7 Sample 8 Sample 9 Sample 10 Sample 11 Sample 12
Sample 13 Sample 14 Sample 15 Sample 16 Sample 17 Sample 18 Sample 19 Sample 20 Sample 21 Sample 22 Sample 23 Sample 24
Sample 32 Sample 25 Sample 26 Sample 27 Sample 28 Sample 29 Sample 30 Sample 31 Sample 33 Sample 34 Sample 35 Sample 36
Sample 37 Sample 38 Sample 39 Sample 40 Sample 41 Sample 42 Sample 43 Sample 44 Sample 45 Sample 46 Sample 47 Sample 48

Plaintiff trial attorneys. Join now for free!

ShowcaseYour Experience

Major Verdict gives you a free public profile to showcase your hard-earned trial verdicts and notable settlements. Let your results speak for themselves to potential clients and peers nationwide. You control what you share, when you edit, and how your public record is presented.