Ten Stereotypes About Malpractice Case That Aren t Always True

How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

In bringing a medical malpractice suit against a doctor or hospital requires proof that the defendant acted in breach of his or her obligation to patients. This evidence can include hospital and medical records.

Our lawyers are adept at taking depositions that are effective for witnesses. They could be doctors or other medical professionals who are in private practice or work at a hospital or clinic.

Negligence

When a patient visits a doctor or hospital professional and receives medical care, they are entitled certain standards of medical treatment. However, in a few instances these standards are not met, or even breached. This breach can have devastating consequences.

When someone is injured or death because of a doctor's negligence, they can bring a lawsuit against the medical professional. To have a legitimate claim, the injured patient must prove that four legal elements are present in the case: breach of duty, causation, and damages.

Malpractice is defined as an act by an individual doctor that is not in line with the accepted norms in the medical community and causes harm to a patient. It is a part of tort law that addresses civil wrongs not criminal offenses or contractual obligations.

Medical negligence differs from regular negligence in that the victim must prove that the doctor knew, or should have known, that their actions were going to cause harm before they are able to claim malpractice. Normal negligence doesn't. A surgeon who accidentally cuts or nicks one of the nerves or veins during surgery is guilty of negligence but not malpractice. This is because the doctor didn't intend to hurt anyone.

In the event of a medical malpractice lawsuit the defendant's obligation is to provide the patient with the standard of care a knowledgeable health professional with similar experience and expertise could provide in similar situations. The breach of duty is important because it proves that the negligent act caused the injury.

Damages

Damages in a malpractice case are dependent on the losses you suffered due to negligence by a doctor. This can include both financial losses, including future medical bills, and non-economic damages such as discomfort and pain.

To be able to claim damages, it is essential to establish that a doctor acted in violation of the duty of care, that his deviation from the standard of care caused injuries, and that the injury caused financial harm that was quantifiable. This is a complicated legal analysis that typically requires expert witness testimony.

Some of the losses can be observed quickly, for example when a mistake made by a doctor resulted in an infection or any other medical condition that require additional treatment. Other damage isn't as evident, like when your doctor misdiagnoses you and you're unable to get the correct treatment.

You can sue for wrongful death in the event that your doctor's negligence results in your death. You can seek punitive damages in addition to the amount you'd get in a lawsuit for survival.

In most states, there are restrictions on the amount you can be awarded in a lawsuit for malpractice. The caps differ by state, and often apply to both economic and non-economic damages. Some states have laws that limit the time you can delay before filing a lawsuit.

Time Limits

As with all lawsuits, there are specific time frames that must be observed or the case could be barred. A malpractice lawsuit should generally be filed between two and six years after the incident occurred. The deadline for filing a malpractice lawsuit varies from state to state.

The time limit is complicated, so it is vital to speak with a lawyer immediately. The law firm will conduct an investigation to determine if malpractice occurred and whether it will be able to stand in the court. This stage takes weeks or even months.

Medical malpractice cases are governed by different laws than other types of cases, and often the statute of limitation is extended. For instance in Pennsylvania the patient has to make a claim within two years from the day they realized the malpractice or that a reasonable person would have known that the harm existed. This is referred to as the discovery rule.

In other states the statute of limitations begins to run from the date the malpractice attorneys happened. This can be an issue when the mistake doesn't immediately cause symptoms. For instance, suppose that an unintentionally negligent doctor leaves a foreign object inside the body following surgery. The patient might not find the object until three years after the procedure. In that situation the statute of limitations might have started to expire from the date the procedure, not the discovery of the error.

Expert Witnesses

Expert witnesses are frequently called upon to explain the facts in medical malpractice cases. A plaintiff's expert will testify regarding the doctor's duty to the patient, medical standards for physicians who have similar qualifications in their area and specialization, and the ways the defendant deviated from the standard. The expert will explain how the deviance directly contributed to the patient's injury.

The defendant will hire an expert to counter the plaintiff's expert and give their professional opinion about whether the doctor was able to provide the required care. Experts could differ but the fact-finder is the one who decides which expert is most reliable.

It is advisable for the expert to remain working in the medical field because they are more knowledgeable about current practices. Judges and jurors are likely to believe that practicing professionals are more trustworthy than experts who rely solely on the testimony of a court.

It is also advisable to hire an expert witness who has expertise in the field of legal malpractice. A medical expert with experience treating breast cancer, for instance, can present a an argument convincingly as to the cause of an injury. A medical malpractice lawyer in Ocala will know which experts to talk to.