Stile v. Korb

Full title: Frank STILE, M.D., an Individual; and Frank Stile M.D., P.C., a Nevada Professional Corporation, Appellants, v. Eva KORB, an Individual, Respondent.

Court: Court of Appeals of Nevada

Date published: May 18, 2022


In October 2010, Dr. Stile performed a breast implant exchange and augmentation on Eva Korb. After three routine post-operation appointments, Dr. Stile instructed Korb to engage only in “[a]ctivity as tolerated” and to return for a fourth follow-up appointment if needed. Korb then embarked on a trip to Asia.

We recount the facts only as necessary for our disposition.

In November 2010, Korb left Dr. Stile a voicemail indicating that she was in Thailand, that she had developed a swollen, painful right breast hematoma, and that a doctor in Thailand recommended drainage surgery. Korb and Dr. Stile corresponded for several days about her options. During their conversations, Dr. Stile cautioned Korb about her increased risk for capsular contracture, stretched skin, and asymmetry. He recommended that she get the hematoma addressed immediately or return to the United States.



The district court granted Korb’s special motion to dismiss, based on Abrams’ decision that a nonmovant failed to meet their burden under prong two of the anti-SLAPP statute. Dr. Stile sought reversal of attorney fees and costs, but the court affirmed the decision to award the stipulated attorney fees and costs. The court also granted Korb $10,000 in damages, as required by NRS 41.670. The judgment of the district court was upheld, and no relief was sought from the parties’ unspecific arguments.

Also, Read

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

three × two =