“The potential and actual harm flowing from this fraudulent act was to one individual, that harm was only economic in nature, and the jury remedied that harm by imposing a significant amount of compensatory damages,” the Georgia Court of Appeals wrote in its opinion. “Under these specific circumstances, the ratio guidepost cuts strongly against a punitive damages award of $65 million.”

The rest of the verdict, including the $650,000 in compensation and more than $500,000 in attorney fees, remains intact. If the ruling is upheld, Parikh’s case will be set to proceed to a limited second trial on the issue of punitive damages.

ExploreGeorgia’s largest jury verdicts award billions in damages

Either side can ask the Georgia Supreme Court to review Thursday’s ruling.

Laurie Webb Daniel, an attorney for Thakkar, said they’re pleased the $65 million component of the verdict has been vacated. She said the Georgia Court of Appeals thoughtfully analyzed the factors required by the U.S. Constitution.

Parikh’s lawyer declined to comment about the case.

Parikh argued at trial that Thakkar had made a career out of defrauding innocent people over three decades, case records show. The doctor said he was the latest victim of Thakkar’s “grooming” and had been convinced to invest more than $2 million in three Atlanta-area restaurants he never received ownership interests in.

“The jury learned at trial that Mr. Thakkar already owed millions of dollars in unpaid judgments including one that was more than 10 years old,” Parikh wrote in a January 2025 court brief. “The jury learned that Mr. Thakkar refused to pay and that victims were having limited success trying to collect.”

Thakkar and Parikh’s failed restaurant venture involving Gyro City Hiram, Gyro City Roswell and Santorini Taverna was cursed by the coronavirus pandemic, Thakkar said in a recent case filing. He said his “falling out” with Parikh did not justify the $65 million verdict.

ExploreKemp’s legal overhaul is now law — but will it bring down insurance costs?

“Parikh is a sophisticated investor, who several years earlier had reaped a handsome profit from a hotel project he and Thakkar had jointly pursued,” Thakkar wrote in a December 2024 court brief.

Thakkar was involved in a hotel development in Gwinnett County, over which he faced several lawsuits in 2014 accusing him of not paying debts.

Parikh sued Thakkar in October 2020 in the Fulton County Superior Court. He said Thakkar owed him $145,000 in loans as well as restaurant ownership interests for his investments. Thakkar had exclusive possession of the restaurants and stole all the associated money and assets he could get his hands on, leaving the eateries insolvent with a string of unpaid creditors, Parikh alleged.

Thakkar argued the restaurants failed in part because Parikh did not financially contribute to their maintenance. He claimed Parikh misappropriated restaurant assets then abandoned the businesses in a state of disrepair.

The jury found in favor of Parikh, deciding Thakkar was liable for fraud. Thakkar intended to harm Parikh and should be punished, according to the verdict.

ExploreAre huge jury verdicts straining Georgia’s economy? Not really, court data shows

In addition to the $65 million in punitive damages, $650,000 in compensation and $525,000 in attorney fees, the jury awarded Parikh $145,000 plus interest for the loans.

Thakkar tried to wipe out the entire verdict but the appeals court said there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding of fraud. The court said Thakkar’s trial testimony was “highly conflicting” and that he acknowledged he never gave Parikh restaurant ownership.

“Parikh also provided evidence that, although he was investing funds that were intended to go to the operation costs of the restaurants, Thakkar withdrew some of this money and placed it into his own personal business,” the appeals court wrote in its ruling.

ExploreFord hit with record $2.5B verdict in Georgia truck rollover suit

The court said Parikh asked the jury to award $1 billion in punitive damages so the case would generate publicity and deter others from doing business with Thakkar. That argument missed the point, the court said.

“Thakkar’s conduct (though the act of fraud, itself, is certainly reprehensible) does not appear to be so reprehensible that it deserves to be punished by an award of $65 million,” the court wrote.