The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has cleared the path for a jury to decide whether a 13-month delay in diagnosing Tanya Smith’s cancer contributed to her death. The October 29 ruling overturns a lower court’s dismissal of the family’s lawsuit against oncologist Dr. Annie Kannarkatt and Cancer Care Associates of York. It marks a pivotal victory for Smith’s husband, Marvin, after years of legal battles over what the family describes as a critical failure to investigate conflicting medical evidence.
Smith initially sought treatment in March 2017 after an enlarged lymph node was found during a shoulder pain checkup at WellSpan York Hospital. Pathologist Dr. John Wright reported findings compatible with metastatic breast cancer. Yet subsequent CT and PET scans failed to locate a primary breast tumor, instead listing lymphoma as a possible diagnosis. Despite these red flags, Kannarkatt initiated chemotherapy and radiation for breast cancer on March 21, 2017. The treatment yielded little improvement, and by November 2017, scans showed the disease had spread significantly.
The correct diagnosis emerged only after Smith underwent a gallbladder removal in March 2018. Analysis of the tissue revealed ALK-positive large B-cell lymphoma, an aggressive and rare cancer. Doctors later confirmed that samples from the original 2017 biopsy matched the 2018 findings, proving Smith had suffered from lymphoma from the start. She transferred to Milton S. Hershey Medical Center for lymphoma-directed chemotherapy, but the cancer returned after an unsuccessful stem cell transplant. Smith died on January 6, 2019.
Legal experts argue the delay proved fatal. Dr. Robert Soiffer, an expert witness for the family, testified that treating the wrong cancer allowed the disease to develop mutations and resistance. “I think it did [deprive her of a better chance], yes,” Soiffer stated when asked if the delay reduced her survival odds. The family’s first trial in October 2021 ended in a hung jury, and a second trial in April 2022 was dismissed by the judge. A state appeals court reversed that decision in March 2024, setting the stage for the Supreme Court’s final review.
The Supreme Court’s judgment clarifies that plaintiffs in delayed-treatment malpractice cases do not need to prove certain survival, only that the alleged negligence increased the risk of harm. The case now returns to trial, where a jury will weigh the expert testimony to determine liability. The next hearing date has not yet been announced, but legal observers expect the proceedings to focus heavily on the conflicting imaging results from 2017.