This case involves allegations of medical malpractice against two neurosurgeons, Dr. Sean Dennis Christie and Dr. Ciara Harraher, arising from a sural nerve biopsy performed on the plaintiff, Gerald Doucet, in December 2009 at the QEII Health Sciences Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Mr. Doucet, then 66 years old and suffering from chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), underwent a sural nerve biopsy to confirm his diagnosis. During the first procedure, performed by Dr. Harraher, two specimens were taken that were later confirmed by pathology to be tendon and muscle, not sural nerve. The following day, Dr. Christie performed a second biopsy and successfully obtained a sural nerve specimen.

Following the procedures, Mr. Doucet developed progressive problems with his left ankle, including inversion deformity, instability, and chronic pain. Over the next several years, his condition deteriorated, leading to multiple unsuccessful orthopedic surgeries and ultimately a below-knee amputation of his left leg in 2014. Mr. Doucet claimed that the removal of significant portions of his tendon during the first biopsy caused the mechanical failure of his ankle, resulting in the need for amputation. He sought damages for pain and suffering, loss of income, valuable services, and costs of care.

The key liability issues centered on whether Dr. Harraher and Dr. Christie breached the standard of care in performing the biopsy and in failing to refer Mr. Doucet for orthopedic assessment after the tendon injury was discovered. Expert evidence was divided: the plaintiff's experts opined that the tendon injury directly caused the ankle deformity and amputation, and that the standard of care was breached by both the surgical error and the lack of referral. The defense experts, however, argued that the amount of tendon removed was small and non-functional due to pre-existing neuropathy, and that Mr. Doucet's progressive ankle problems and amputation were the result of his underlying medical conditions, including CIDP, diabetes, and repeated falls, rather than the biopsy.

The court found the defense evidence more persuasive, noting that the standard of care for a senior neurosurgery resident did not require direct supervision for a minor procedure like a sural nerve biopsy, and that the removal of small tendon samples was a recognized risk of the procedure. The court also noted that none of Mr. Doucet's treating physicians at the time considered an orthopedic referral necessary, and that the radiological evidence did not show a tendon rupture at the biopsy site. Ultimately, the court concluded that neither Dr. Harraher nor Dr. Christie breached the standard of care, and that the plaintiff's injuries were not causally connected to the December 2009 biopsy but were instead attributable to his underlying medical conditions.

Although the claim was dismissed, the court provisionally assessed general damages at $225,000, recognizing the significant impact of the amputation on Mr. Doucet's life, including chronic pain, loss of mobility, and reduced quality of life. The court also considered but dismissed claims for past and future loss of income, finding that Mr. Doucet's multiple health problems would have precluded a return to work even absent the ankle injury. The court awarded costs to the defendants.