Family of Grace Schara seeks new trial, alleges judge’s bias in Appleton hospital lawsuit

A poster at a news conference hosted by the Schara family March 30, 2023. PC: Fox 11 Online

APPLETON, WI (WTAQ-WLUK) – The family of Grace Schara, which lost a civil lawsuit against St. Elizabeth Hospital, is asking for a new trial, claiming the judge was biased against the family.

The family of Grace Schara, who had Down syndrome, sued Ascension St. Elizabeth Hospital for medical malpractice, claiming the doctors and nurses who cared for the 19-year-old violated her patient rights when they listed her as a DNR, or do not resuscitate, without the family’s consent. They also alleged she was given a lethal cocktail of drugs that led to her death in October 2021 after she contracted COVID-19.

After a trial, the jury ruled in June for the hospital.

In a motion filed Wednesday, Scott Schara claims the discovery of what it terms as bias by Judge Mark McGinnis is new evidence, and a new trial should be ordered.

It was not until after trial that Plaintiff discovered evidence of this Court’s personal bias, which appears to have influenced its rulings against Plaintiff. Several weeks after trial the Court violated multiple rules in ordering Plaintiff to pay Defendants’ costs of over $50,000.00, and several months after trial Plaintiff learned of the criticisms previously published by the Appleton Post-Crescent directed at the Court, which showed the Court’s personal bias against that publication. Not until he discovered evidence of what appears to be the Court’s personal bias against him and against the Appleton Post-Crescent did Plaintiff understand the basis for the Court’s denial of his motions in limine. Plaintiff now understands that when the Court learned, two weeks before trial, that Plaintiff had recently given an interview to the Post-Crescent and announced that Plaintiff would have consequences for this, the Court was reacting to the confluence of two things that it found personally repugnant: Plaintiff and the Post-Crescent. For the Court, this must have seemed like the perfect storm or the worst of all possible worlds. Almost immediately thereafter, the Court summarily denied all of Plaintiff’s motions in limine without allowing argument,” the motion states. “With this evidence now in hand, rather than appealing over this Court’s head. Plaintiff wishes to give this Court a chance to correct this injustice.