Bristol Hospital. Courtesy photo

Catching a discrepancy between defense testimony during deposition and testimony during trial helped a Hartford lawyer clinch a nearly $3.3 million jury verdict.

Plaintiffs attorney Thomas Cella said he noticed that testimony from an expert witness for the defense during deposition did not match what was offered at trial.

And it was that detail the attorney used to help sway the jury in favor of his client, whose son was once the mayor of Bristol.

The testimony, Cella said, dealt with whether a nurse could have been at fault in a medical malpractice case against Bristol Hospital.

During deposition the hospital had maintained that a nurse could have inserted an enema that perforated the patient's rectum. But Cella said he noticed that experts testifying during trial said just the opposite: It would have been nearly impossible for a nurse to have done that.

The case turned on these witnesses' trustworthiness. After a two-week trial, a New Britain Superior Court jury awarded $3.257 million to plaintiff Bruce Cockayne and his wife Marion, who filed a complaint in July 2016.

"Expert testimony often does not go as you hope it will," said Cella, a partner with Hartford-based Howard, Kohn, Sprague & Fitzgerald. "We were able to attack their testimony at trial, because it was not consistent with what they said in deposition. And drawing out those inconsistencies was critical for the jury."

The plaintiff argued a hospital nurse had accidentally perforated Bruce Cockayne's rectum in trying to insert an enema after he went to the hospital complaining of severe diarrhea. It claimed the hospital had conceded as much during discovery, allegedly acknowledging the possibility, but then later offering a different explanation.

"During trial the defense said it was impossible for the nurse to have done this," Cella said. "That was completely inconsistent to what they were saying during discovery."

Representing Bristol Hospital are Rocky Hill-based O'Brien Tanski & Young attorneys Albert Danker Jr. and Michael Rigg. Neither responded to a request for comment Tuesday.

Christopher Boyle, the hospital's director of public relations, issued a statement on the verdict.

"Bristol Hospital is disappointed by the verdict, and we expect to prevail in the appeal," Boyle wrote. "We stand by our employees, and are proud of the safe and quality care that we provide to the community."

The defense has 40 days from the date of the jury verdict to file post-verdict motions.

In court pleadings, the defense argued there was insufficient proof of a misstep by a hospital nurse, and said the plaintiff's team bore the burden of supplying that proof.

The hospital also argued that Cockayne's Crohn's disease had caused the perforation, but the plaintiff disagreed.

"Crohn's disease is known to cause, on occasion, spontaneous perforations," Cella acknowledged. "The problem, though, was that my client did not have Crohn's in his rectum."

Cella said the hospital had administered an enema on three consecutive days in February 2014 to Cockayne, 76. He said his client soon "had a massive rectal bleed" that led clinicians to discover the perforation.

Cockayne, who is the father of former Bristol mayor Ken Cockayne, had at least four surgeries due to the perforated rectum, according to information from his attorney.

"He was in a lot of pain, and suffered for about a year," Cella said.

No more surgeries are pending, the attorney said.

Cella said the Cockayne family was "ecstatic" about the jury verdict.

"They did not want to go through a trial, as Bristol Hospital was their hometown hospital," he said. "They wanted to resolve it, but it just could not be resolved."

The jury verdict includes $770,000 for loss of consortium claims on behalf of Cockayne's wife.

Read more:

Case to Proceed Against Bristol Hospital, Surgeon Accused of Sex Assault