On June 25, 2019, Georgia Ann Miller filed an Indiana medical malpractice action against Trinh Tran, M.D. and his medical practice alleging that Dr. Tran’s treatment caused her to sustain her tendon injuries and to also experience weight gain, depression, hair loss, and other symptoms. On November 2, 2020, the Indiana Medical Review Panel issued its opinion that Dr. Tran “failed to meet the applicable standard of care but the conduct complained of was not a factor of the resultant damages.”
For trial, Miller designated Dr. Robert Gregori as an expert witness on whether Dr. Tran’s treatment caused Miller’s injuries. On April 5, 2024, Miller filed a motion in limine in which she sought to preclude “testimony or evidence from any witness or argument by defense counsel of Dr. Robert Gregori’s past criminal conviction, substance abuse, or disciplinary action taken against Dr. Gregori’s medical license.” In 2007, Dr. Gregori’s medical license was suspended after Dr. Gregori pleaded guilty to five felony offenses for writing false opiate prescriptions. His medical license was reinstated in full in 2012; however, he did not seek to reinstate his Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) license to prescribe opiates. Dr. Gregori’s practice now principally consists of providing medical opinions, and he clinically treats few patients.
The trial court ruled that the defense could discuss Dr. Gregori’s license suspension and the factual circumstances behind it but could not “talk about the convictions.” The trial court noted that it was “not convinced” that Dr. Gregori’s offenses were “crimes of dishonesty.”
At the conclusion of the evidence, Miller objected to two of the trial court’s proposed final instructions: (1) the Choice of Treatment Modalities instruction and (2) an instruction that the jury could consider criminal convictions in determining witness credibility. The trial court overruled both objections and gave the final instructions. The jury returned a verdict finding Dr. Tran and Allcare not liable. Miller subsequently appealed.
Miller argued that the trial court erred by permitting cross-examination regarding the factual circumstances behind Dr. Gregori’s license suspension. The Court of Appeals of Indiana stated in its February 26, 2025 opinion: “Miller never objected to Dr. Gregori’s testimony regarding the factual circumstances of his license suspension nor moved to strike that testimony. On the contrary, Miller deliberately presented this information to the jury. During voir dire, Miller informed the prospective jurors that Dr. Gregori’s medical license was previously suspended due to him “prescribing medication for himself, narcotics” … Because Miller did not preserve at trial her challenge to the admission of evidence regarding the factual background of Dr. Gregori’s license suspension, Miller’s challenge to the trial court’s ruling is clearly waived.”
The Indiana appellate court further stated: “Dr. Gregori was not convicted of a crime of dishonesty nor one of the
enumerated convictions under Evidence Rule 609(a)(1). His convictions are also much older than ten years old and had little probative value with regard to the case … Dr. Gregori’s convictions, thus, would not have been admissible as crimes of dishonesty under Evidence Rule 609. Because Dr. Gregori’s convictions would not have been admissible as crimes of dishonesty, the trial court erred by instructing the jury that it could consider that Dr. Gregori was “convicted of a crime” in determining his credibility … Nonetheless, we find this error to be harmless … Here, several items of evidence tended to undermine Dr. Gregori’s credibility. Dr. Gregori testified that he orchestrated a “scheme”—his own words—by making his friends patients, writing them opiate prescriptions, and diverting the drugs to himself to “maintain [his] addiction.” Tr. Vol. II p. 239. Thus, although Dr. Gregori was not convicted of a crime of dishonesty for the purposes of Evidence Rule 609, his convictions clearly did involve dishonesty. And Dr. Gregori voluntarily drew attention to his criminal convictions several times during his direct examination regardless of the trial court’s instruction. Dr. Gregori admitted that his prescription practices caused his license to be suspended, at least partially, for approximately five years. Furthermore, Dr. Gregori admitted that he is not a rheumatologist, and he clinically treats few patients.”
“We recognize that Dr. Gregori was the only witness to offer an opinion that Dr. Tran’s steroid treatment caused Miller’s injuries. Dr. Gregori, however, agreed that aging can contribute to tendon injuries … In light of the evidence disproving Miller’s causation claim, the evidence separate from Dr. Gregori’s convictions that tended to undermine his credibility, and the fact that Dr. Gregori volunteered the evidence regarding his convictions, we are not persuaded that the trial court’s instruction meaningfully affected the jury’s verdict.”
With regard to the plaintiff’s argument that the trial erred by giving the Choice of Treatment Modalities Instruction, the Indiana appellate court held: “We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by offering this instruction—neither as a preliminary nor a final instruction. Miller only appears to argue that the record lacked evidence to support giving the instruction. But the record included evidence regarding different methods of treatment. Dr. Tran testified that her course of treatment was proper because Miller’s symptoms were the result of inflammatory disease, and two medical experts opined that Dr. Tran selected an appropriate course of treatment … Although Miller’s expert witnesses disagreed with Dr. Tran’s treatment of Miller, it was for the jury to determine which opinion to find credible.”
Source Miller v. Tran, M.D., Court of Appeals Case No. 24A-CT-1187.
If you or a loved one were injured (or worse) as a result of medical malpractice in Indiana or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find an Indiana medical malpractice lawyer, or a medical malpractice lawyer in your state, who may investigate your medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Visit our website or call us on our toll-free number in the United States (800-295-3959) to find medical malpractice attorneys near you who may help you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
