free
hit counter
Medical Malpractice Broken Bone | Medical Malpractice Cases Nevada

This means that you need to find a qualified medical expert that is willing to attend a deposition and testify in court that you were injured by a health care provider’s negligence. Just who is qualified to testify as a medical expert witness is subject to a host of complicated and restrictive rules. An experienced plaintiff’s medical malpractice attorney will have a better network to draw from, but tracking down a qualified expert willing to testify on your behalf can be quite difficult, particularly if your case is a close call. Also, medical experts don’t work for free -- expect to pay a significant hourly rate. Some attorneys might front the medical expert expenses if they really think you have a winning case, but don’t count on it . . . and make sure to ask about your responsibility for litigation expenses up front.
GOOD LUCK getting THEM to write you a prescription for a highly addictive drug, betting none of their patients will abuse it and then try to destroy them, for their kindness. If you think surgery is expensive in this country, just wait until you see the price of pain management, in a society full of overgrown children who believe that every mistake they make is somebody elses’ fault. By siding with the abuser, juries have no idea how painful a mistake they are making for themselves. Chronic pain comes to almost all of us in time, but in the future, relief from it may only be found on the streets at 30 times the cost, and risking prison to get it.

The first step is a letter of demand, a letter sent by your lawyer to the doctor or health facility concerned, setting out your claim and the period in which the accused should meet it. Thereafter, getting a case to court can take up to four years. Accurate case data and hospital notes have to be gathered; records relating to the patient’s prior medical history, treatment at the hands of the suspected transgressor, and any subsequent treatment must be obtained. Then, lay witnesses must be found, expert witnesses briefed and court dates agreed on. In addition, both the patient’s medical condition and prevailing medical treatments have to be researched.


The United States Government will pay $42 million to the parents of a young child who suffered a permanent brain injury, resulting from improper use of forceps during his delivery.  After a six day trial in Federal Court in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the verdict for $42 million was rendered by U.S. District Court Judge Sylvia Rambo.  The parents sued the Federal Government in a malpractice claim involving an Ob/Gyn physician, who was employed at a federal facility.  The lawsuit claimed that the doctor improperly used forceps on the baby’s head during the delivery, which caused skull fractures and bleeding on the brain that resulted in permanent brain damage.  Evidence presented during trial showed that the now five year old boy cannot speak, read or write and eventually will require a motorized wheelchair to get around.
A study by RAND Corp. researchers published in October 2014 in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that laws restricting medical-malpractice suits do not reduce the amount of "defensive medicine" or reduce health-care costs. The researchers, led by Daniel A. Waxman, examined 3.8 million Medicare patient records from hospital emergency departments from 1997 to 2011, comparing care in three states that enacted strict malpractice reform laws about a decade earlier (Georgia, Texas and South Carolina) to care in neighboring states that did not enact such laws. The study found that the laws had no effect on whether doctors ordered resource-intensive care (e.g., CT or MRI scans and hospitalization).[55][56][57]

According to a study by the Department of Health and Human Service's Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality found that one in ten patients that die within 90 days of a surgery are killed because of a preventable error. When medical malpractice occurs, not only are patients' lives adversely affected, so are their pocket books. According to the Department of Health and Human Service's study:


Suing the Government under the FTCA is different than suing a private company or individual.  There are a number of hoops that you have to jump through before you can even file the lawsuit. There are also certain limitations in lawsuits against the Government that you don’t have in lawsuits against private parties.  While you are entitled to a trial under the FTCA, it is a “bench trial,” meaning the judge renders the decision and not a jury.  Fortunately for the victims in the above-referenced malpractice case, the judge recognized the serious and permanent nature of the child’s injuries and the extraordinary expenses that would be required to provide for the child’s future medical and life care needs.
These critics assert that these rate increases are causing doctors to go out of business or move to states with more favorable tort systems.[30] Not everyone agrees, though, that medical malpractice lawsuits are solely causing these rate increases.[31] A 2003 report from the General Accounting Office found multiple reasons for these rate increases, with medical malpractice lawsuits being the primary driver.[32] Despite noting multiple reasons for rate increases, the report goes on to state that the "GAO found that losses on medical malpractice claims-which make up the largest part of insurers’ costs-appear to be the primary driver of rate increases in the long run." More recent data has indicated that medical malpractice rates are generally no longer rising. In 2011, data pooled from the industry by the publication Medical Liability Monitor indicated that medical malpractice insurance rates had declined for four straight years. The decrease was seen in both states that had enacted tort reform and in states that had not, leading actuaries familiar with the data to suggest that patient safety and risk management campaigns had had a more significant effect.[33]

at no point did I mention that he does not believe that the medicine is not in my best interest. He claimed he did not know about the illness which is absurd and insulting to the intelligence. I have been around doctors plenty, and know more than the average person about digestive problems. I have seen doctors in the US and overseas. no one, not even the newbies said that they do not know about it. everyone knows it and knows the treatment for it. That is why I am extremely upset about being turned away and want him to be held accountable for not treating a patient. I could careless about getting money out of him and if I do I would put most of to research of this disease. About the comment about going out on a limb, the medications I have do not contain any narcotics or any substance that is addictive or gives any kind of high. I also brought a bag with all my medications. that been said, am I to understand that since there are sting patients a guy like me who has blood coming out of his body every day should go untreated or even checked on the very least. That does not make any sense. These has to be a law somewhere that protects people from that kind of behavior.
A physician would be insane to risk his hard earned career by continuing to prescribe controlled substances to all the pts who cross his threshold. Physicians already place their pts’ health above their self interests. What profession do you know of that you are regularly expected to miss holidays and special occasions? Work long shifts overnight? Law, business, engineering? I think it’s reasonable to say that a pts’ wellbeing should not supersede my ability to lead a somewhat normal life and provide for my family (who did not take the Hippocratic Oath).
Medical malpractice claims don't only cover errors in diagnosis and treatment. Once you've established a doctor-patient relationship, the doctor owes you a duty of care and treatment with the degree of skill, care, and diligence as possessed by, or expected of, a reasonably competent physician under the same or similar circumstances. Part of that duty of care is to be forthcoming with your diagnosis, treatment options and prognosis, as reasonably competent physicians would not lie to their patients.
×