Fundamental in a medical malpractice lawsuit is determining whether an unfortunate outcome is an error of nature or a medical error. An error of nature results from a medical intervention that aligns with the standard of care. A medical error, on the other hand, results from a medical intervention that departs from the standard of care.

The problem in medical malpractice is that errors of nature can be random occurrences even …

Read more…

Primum non nocere, “first, do no harm,” is the prime directive of medical ethics for all physicians. It is also the first thing that comes into question when maleficence by a doctor is suspected.

The standard of care is how any prudent and competent practitioner should exercise their duty to, “first, do no harm,” when managing a specific medical condition. The standard of care is empirical and adjusts to circumstances that …

Read more…

As shown in my earlier post, when prosecuting Byrom vs. Johns Hopkins Bayview Hospital with inductive reasoning, as is traditional, the medical intervention is compared to the standard of care in a very general and subjective way. The medical intervention “more likely than not” departs from the standard of care. “More likely than not” corresponds to a level of confidence of around 51 percent and a type-1 error of …

Read more…

In medical malpractice, inductive reasoning regards the standard of care as the duty to do no harm. If there is a complication from a medical intervention and the medical intervention differs from the standard of care in any conceivable way, the difference alone is sufficient to conclude that the medical intervention departs from that duty.

However, unanticipated threats require nimbleness. This is a calculated risk. It causes a difference, but it …

Read more…

A quote by Sir Winston Churchill: “However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.”

Actually, Churchill never said this. It may have been Ian Gilmour, a member of Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, years after Churchill’s death. Nevertheless, this quote is often cited in the context of risk management. It is as relevant in a medical malpractice lawsuit as it is a warning to malpractice attorneys. No matter how elegant …

Read more…

In the August 2023 issue of MD Linx, Stephanie Srakocic writes about a Philadelphia jury that awards a $1.4 million verdict against a nurse practitioner for failing to treat hyperthyroidism. The patient, who is hyperthyroid, is admitted to the hospital for acute abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. The patient subsequently dies. The implication is that the patient is under the care of a nurse practitioner, and there is no …

Read more…

James Haliczer, an erstwhile defense attorney turned plaintiff attorney, audaciously claims in a YouTube video that “there is no such thing as a frivolous lawsuit.”

There are ten species of stakeholders in medical malpractice litigation: claimants, plaintiff attorneys, defendants, defense attorneys, medical experts, medical expert directories, mentors, malpractice insurance carriers, and jurors. They are part of the medical liability litigation industry.

With the exception of defendants and jurors, each prospers from $55.6 …

Read more…

If you are embroiled in a medical malpractice lawsuit today, you are in a difficult situation.

Your lawsuit is one of 85,000 medical malpractice cases filed each year. Regardless of what your defense counsel tells you about merit, no one truly knows how many lawsuits have merit. A prominent defense attorney has gone on record declaring that there is no such thing as a frivolous lawsuit and publicly disavows any notion …

Read more…

There are 85,000 medical malpractice lawsuits filed annually. Among them, 52,190 are summarily dropped for reasons unknown; 26,860 are settled; 1,190 result in plaintiff verdicts, and 4,760 in defense verdicts. Only 33.3% of these lawsuits are likely to have merit, while 66.7% do not. To make matters worse, only one out of every 37.5 claims reviewed by attorneys is represented, meaning that 3,102,500 other claims are abandoned for reasons known …

Read more…

For two years, I have used this venue to expose medical malpractice litigation as a serious threat to society and the medical profession. From your responses, I conclude that patients and doctors are ready for a paradigm shift. Two elements are essential: rational decision-making and stakeholders like yourselves who care. I have the decision-making model, and you have the desire. However, you are paralyzed by hopelessness.

Meanwhile, 85,000 medical malpractice lawsuits …

Read more…

There is a serious flaw in medical malpractice litigation, and it is not what you may think. My post about a hypothetical medical malpractice case is not hypothetical but emblematic of the flaw. Medical staff at a major hospital in Washington, DC, did depart from applicable standards of care regarding limb salvage. The patient is actually a 78-year-old family member who suffers septic shock and a left above-the-knee amputation. There …

Read more…

In my research on the case selection criteria used by plaintiff medical malpractice attorneys, one very prominent plaintiff attorney in Maryland spills the beans. He proudly proclaims, “We, who are plaintiff attorneys, take on medical malpractice caused by doctors, but we only accept 1 out of every 37.5 cases we review.” This is done unselfishly and without appreciation.

Seen another way, 87,000 medical malpractice cases are filed every year in the …

Read more…

In Gerald Green’s The Last Angry Man, Dr. Samuel Abelman is a general practitioner in the twilight of a career that spans fifty years of commitment to patients.

The time is the 1950s, and the place is Brooklyn, NY. The problem is the proliferation of medical specialties.

Although most of his colleagues regard specialization as a greater good because it promises better-trained physicians, Dr. Abelman sees specialization as antithetical to his …

Read more…