Half-assed screening of malpractice cases

“The House Judiciary Committee [in New Hampshire] is poised to recommend a compromise which would create a method for malpractice cases to be screened before going to trial in the hopes both sides can reach a settlement . . . It is a system based on one in Massachusetts, however, that state uses a panel comprised of a judge, lawyer and doctor to decide if a malpractice case has merit.

‘We tried to get a swift, simple system that will work,’ said Rep. Robert Rowe, R-Amherst, a retired attorney. ‘Who better than a judge to screen these cases?'”

Hmm, someone with medical training probably would be better – but maybe that’s just me. How is this different from a doctor deciding on legal malpractice cases?