Jury returns verdict for defense in eye surgery malpractice suit

A jury sided with the defendant in a $200,000 medical malpractice suit out of St. Francois County Circuit Court.

The jury decided in favor of the defendant, Precision Eye Care, Sept. 10. Plaintiff Albert Beal, 69, filed the suit after alleging damaged vision following attempted cataract surgery in 2022.

Beal was set to undergo cataract surgery with ophthalmologist Anton Beffa at The Surgery Center of Farmington Dec. 31, 2022. After Beal showed extreme photophobia during an exam, Beffa decided to additional an additional anesthetic, known as retrobulbar block, to prevent eye movement during the surgery. Beffa expressed concern that Beal would not be able to tolerate the surgery with only IV sedation. Retrobulbar block involves injecting lidocaine directly below the eyeball after the patient is sedated to prevent muscle movement. It is a “blind injection” in that the surgeon cannot see the needle.

At the moment Beffa inserted the needle into the Beal’s eye — after he had been sedated — Beal’s head jerked, causing the needle to perforate the eye globe and resulting in retinal detachment. Beffa did not immediately notice the perforation and proceeded with the lidocaine injection. After allowing some time for akinesia, Beffa was about to start surgery when he noticed blood at the front of Beal’s eye, which he determined to be retinal detachment after examining it.

Beffa made arrangement for Beal to be seen by a retina specialist, and he underwent surgical procedures to repair the retina. He maintained vision in the eye but alleged permanent blurry vision and light sensitivity.

The plaintiff was represented by lead attorney Ken Leeds of St. Louis. The defendant was represented by lead attorney Justin Hardin with Brown & James in St. Louis, as well Nicolas Espinosa, also with Brown & James.

The plaintiff’s expert, ophthalmologist Douglas Katsev of Santa Barbara Eyecare in Santa Barbara, California, testified via deposition that Beffa breached the standard of care by not anticipating Beal’s head movement, and that perforating the eyeball during a retrobulbar block was “the ultimate sin” in ophthalmology, and that Beffa must have been negligent. Katsev was also critical of the use of a retrobulbar block for cataract surgery.

The plaintiff’s attorneys also claimed there were no reported cases in the literature of a globe perforation during retrobulbar block that was caused by the patient’s head moving, concluding that Beal’s injury was the first to ever occur and Beffa must have been negligent.

The defense presented testimony from Beffa who described Beal as “sufficiently sedated” prior to the attempted block. While on the stand, he demonstrated to the jury the plaintiff’s head movement when Beffa inserted the needle.

The defense’s expert, ophthalmologist Elizbeth Davis with Center for Sight in Sarasota, Florida, testified globe perforation during a retrobulbar block is a known and accepted risk of the procedure and that head movement increases that risk. She further testified that while physicians are trained to anticipate things going wrong in surgery, that is not the same as prevention, and that Beffa met the standard of care.

The jury deliberated for 25 minutes before returning a defense verdict.

Hardin said he felt the jury’s decision was fair, and that his client was “very satisfied” with the verdict.

“While the ultimate surgical outcome was not as planned, the physician was not negligent and we were pleased that the jury was attentive and listened to the evidence,” Hardin stated. “It’s not easy for physicians who dedicated their lives to helping people to be put through this adversarial process.”

Hardin said he “commended” Beffa for seeing the case through the end “to clear his name and ensure justice was achieved.”

“The judge was excellent, he made great rulings,” said Leed. “He tried a great case.”

RELATED: Click to search for and submit your Verdicts & Settlements

Medical Malpractice

Verdict for defendant

Type of action: Medical malpractice

Venue: St. Francois Circuit Court

Case Number/Date: 22SF-CC0232, 09/10/2025

Caption: Albert Beal v. Precision Eye Care, Ltd.

Injuries alleged: Eye

Plaintiff’s Attorneys: Ken Leeds in St. Louis

Defendant’s Attorneys: Justin Hardin and Nicolas Espinosa with Brown & James in St. Louis

Insurance carrier(s): Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company, for defendant Precision Eye Care

Plaintiff expert(s): Ophthalmologist Douglas Katsev with Santa Barbara Eyecare in Santa Barbara, California

Defendant expert(s): Ophthalmologist Elizabeth Davis with Center for Sight in Sarasota, Florida