AC46510, AC46730 - Sobin v. Orthopaedic Sports Specialists, P.C. ("Before us are two appeals and a cross appeal that arise out of an action for wrongful death and loss of consortium brought against the defendant, Orthopaedic Sports Specialists, P.C., by the plaintiffs—Linda Sobin (Sobin) as the administratrix of the estate of her husband, Peter Sobin (Peter), and Sobin in her individual capacity—following Peter's death from a pulmonary embolism that occurred during his recovery from knee replacement surgery.

In Docket No. AC 46510, the defendant appeals from the judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiffs on the jury's verdict awarding $5.5 million in damages for wrongful death due to medical negligence and $3 million in damages for loss of consortium.The defendant claims that the trial court improperly (1) failed to strike certain responses given by the plaintiffs' medical expert in response to hypothetical questions that, the defendant argues, relied on facts not in evidence; (2) failed to grant a mistrial based on the plaintiffs' counsel's allegedly inflammatory and unduly prejudicial examination of a key witness; (3) precluded the defendant's medical expert from testifying regarding the origin and size of the pulmonary embolism; and (4) instructed the jury that it could award damages for Peter's "death itself" in addition to damages for pain and suffering.

In Docket No. AC 46730, the plaintiffs appeal from the judgment of the trial court denying, in part, the plaintiffs' motion for offer of compromise interest. They claim that the court improperly declined to award offer of compromise interest with respect to Sobin's loss of consortium damages. The defendant filed a cross appeal in which it claims that the court should not have awarded any offer of compromise interest. In particular, the defendant argues that the purported offer of compromise was not a proper offer to settle and withdraw the action but an offer to stipulate to a judgment, which, the defendant asserts, rendered it invalid as an offer of compromise.

We disagree with the claims raised by the parties in both appeals and the cross appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the court."