The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a decision on Jan. 14, 2026, in Brandi Booth v. Jonathan Lazzara, a complex medical malpractice case involving the wrongful death of Dustin Booth. The case, designated as No. 24-3894, was recommended for publication pursuant to Sixth Circuit Internal Operating Procedure 32.1(b), indicating its potential significance for future legal precedent.
Brandi Booth, serving as administratrix of the estate of Dustin Booth, brought the appeal against multiple defendants including Dr. Jonathan Lazzara, a doctor of osteopathic medicine, and several other individuals: Robert Buchanan, Mike Rosenbalm, Brian Curlis, Fred Doughman, and Drew Aspacher. The City of Monroe, Ohio, was also named as a defendant in the lawsuit.
The case originated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton, where District Judge Michael J. Newman presided over the initial proceedings. The case was filed as No. 3:22-cv-00197, indicating it was initiated in 2022 before making its way to the appeals court.
The appeal was argued before a three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges McKEAGUE, MURPHY, and DAVIS on June 12, 2025. The court took approximately seven months to issue its decision, which was both decided and filed on Jan. 14, 2026.
Representing the appellant Brandi Booth was Konrad Kircher of KIRCHER LAW LLC in Cincinnati, Ohio. The defendants were represented by multiple law firms, reflecting the complex nature of the litigation. Dawn M. Frick of SURDYK, DOWD & TURNER in Dayton, Ohio, represented defendants Buchanan, Rosenbalm, Curlis, Aspacher, and the City of Monroe. Katherine L. Barbiere of SCHROEDER, MAUNDRELL, BARBIERE & POWERS in Mason, Ohio, represented defendant Doughman.
The case appears to involve allegations of medical malpractice resulting in the death of Dustin Booth, though the specific details of the medical treatment, the circumstances surrounding Booth's death, and the nature of the alleged negligence are not detailed in the available court documents. The involvement of multiple defendants, including medical professionals and municipal officials, suggests a complex factual scenario that likely involved multiple parties in Booth's care or treatment.
The inclusion of the City of Monroe, Ohio, as a defendant indicates potential municipal liability issues, which could relate to emergency medical services, hospital operations, or other municipal healthcare functions. The presence of multiple individual defendants alongside the municipal entity suggests the case may have involved questions about the scope of governmental immunity and individual liability for public employees or contractors.
The decision to recommend the case for publication signals that the Sixth Circuit's ruling addresses legal issues of broader significance beyond the immediate parties. Published opinions serve as binding precedent within the circuit and persuasive authority in other jurisdictions, making them valuable for future litigation involving similar legal questions.
Medical malpractice cases involving wrongful death claims typically require plaintiffs to establish that healthcare providers breached the applicable standard of care and that this breach proximately caused the patient's death. When municipal entities are involved, additional complexities arise regarding governmental immunity, the scope of municipal liability for healthcare services, and the application of state tort claims acts.
The case's journey from district court to the appeals level, spanning from 2022 to 2026, reflects the typically lengthy timeline for complex medical malpractice litigation. The substantial legal representation on both sides, with multiple law firms involved, underscores the significance and complexity of the legal and factual issues at stake.
While the specific outcome of the appeal is not detailed in the available documents, the court's decision to publish the opinion suggests it addresses important questions of law that will guide future cases involving similar fact patterns or legal theories. The ruling may have implications for how courts handle medical malpractice claims involving multiple defendants, municipal liability in healthcare contexts, or procedural issues in wrongful death litigation.
The case represents another addition to the growing body of federal case law addressing medical malpractice and municipal liability issues. As healthcare delivery systems become increasingly complex, with multiple providers and entities involved in patient care, cases like Booth v. Lazzara help establish legal frameworks for determining liability and responsibility when adverse outcomes occur.
For legal practitioners specializing in medical malpractice or municipal law, the published opinion will likely provide valuable guidance on handling similar cases and understanding the Sixth Circuit's approach to these complex liability questions.