A 40-year-old female pharmaceutical salesperson underwent lasik surgery to both eyes for myopic astigmatism in 1998, with enhancement surgery performed on both eyes in 1999. She alleged that the defendant surgeon and practice failed to properly measure her pupil size in dim light and thus discover her abnormally large pupil, and that the practice as a result failed to inform her of her enhanced risk of developing night vision problems following surgery.
She claimed "night blindness" after surgery caused by halo and starburst effects in low light conditions which disabled her from driving or working at night, and severely impaired all dim light activities.
DBMS contended that her dim light pupil size had been repeatedly and accurately measured and found to be normal, that she was informed of all risks of the procedure, and that a larger than normal pupil measured by subsequent ophthalmologists was caused by her chronic use of antihistamine and antidepressant medications.
The defense further contended that any link between mesopic pupil size and enhanced lasik night vision risk had been disproven by multiple studies.
Plaintiff asked the jury for $2.5 million, while the jury deliberated for less than one hour before returning a defense verdict.