free
hit counter
Medical Malpractice Attorney Seattle | Medical Malpractice Act

Many states require patients to jump through a few hoops before filing medical malpractice lawsuits. These requirements vary by state. A patient might have to file an affidavit of merit in which a qualified medical expert attests that the plaintiff has a valid case. A patient also might have to submit a claim to a medical review board before filing in court, or agree to some form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR).
Various studies have shown that the Texas tort-reform law has had no effect on healthcare costs or the number of physicians practicing in the state.[45] A February 2014 study found "no evidence to support" the claim that "there had been a dramatic increase in physicians moving to Texas due to the improved liability climate."[47] The study found that this is true "for all patient care physicians in Texas, high-malpractice-risk specialties, primary care physicians, and rural physicians.[47]
The more common (and some believe more reliable) approach used by all federal courts and most state courts is the 'gatekeeper' model, which is a test formulated from the US Supreme Court cases Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (509 U.S. 579 [1993]), General Electric Co. v. Joiner (522 U.S. 136 [1997]), and Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (526 U.S. 137 [1999]). Before the trial, a Daubert hearing[15] will take place before the judge (without the jury). The trial court judge must consider evidence presented to determine whether an expert's "testimony rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand." (Daubert, 509 U.S. at 597). The Daubert hearing considers 4 questions about the testimony the prospective expert proposes:
It is typically the referring physician who orders the tests, or the provider responsible for administering medical tests (a radiologist or pathologist) who is named as a defendant in a malpractice case involving failed communication of test results. Depending on the case, it may also be possible to hold the hospital itself, responsible for patient harm due to negligent failure to communicate the results of medical testing.
Despite this, the perception of “lawsuits gone wild” exists. As a result, many states have imposed substantial limits on damage awards in medical-malpractice claims. These award limits typically have the greatest impact on patients who are most gravely hurt—those with catastrophic injuries and a lifetime of future medical needs. And patients who are denied justice in the courts must rely on health insurance and, in many instances, such public programs as Medicare or Medicaid to pay their future medical bills—leaving the cost of medical malpractice to the public instead of the responsible party.
In order to successfully prosecute a medical malpractice lawsuit, the party bringing the action (the plaintiff) must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the negligent act of a healthcare provider caused injury to the plaintiff. The entire burden of proof resides on the plaintiff; the government need not even present a witness. In order to prove its case, the plaintiff must present the testimony of qualified experts who support his position. Identifying experts and working with them is a major part of preparing your case for trial. Our firm retains only experts of impeccable character and the highest professional credentials. We do this to ensure that when we get to trial, the United States will be unable to attack our case by attacking our experts.
A malpractice claim exists if a provider's negligence causes injury or damages to a patient. However, experiencing a bad outcome isn't always proof of medical negligence. Also, on occasion, health-care providers will inform a patient that the person has received negligent medical care from a previous health-care provider and—presumably in an effort at complete honesty—will sometimes tell a patient that they, themselves, have made a mistake.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) models attempt to accomplish just that. Unlike the traditional medical culture in which physicians and other professionals are discouraged from acknowledging their mistakes or discussing what happened with the injured patient/their family, ADR models promote straightforward communication and peaceful resolution.

Once a doctor initiates treatment of a patient, the doctor must not only terminate care at a proper time, but also in a proper manner. If a doctor transfers a patient to the care of a second doctor, the second doctor may not be familiar with crucial details of a patient's care. So, the first doctor has an ongoing obligation to provide the second doctor with proper instructions and all relevant records (treatment notes, test results, etc.). Failure to do so could rise to the level of medical malpractice.

As can be seen by looking at the table of negligence laws, there is great diversity among the states as to how negligence is handled. As the law of negligence continues to mature and change, courts have led the way in defining the laws and legislatures have in may cases responded with statutes that both recognize the cause of action and often limit it as well.


One of the most common reasons that a physician may be accused of medical malpractice is due to the failure to diagnose. This is premised on the idea that the patient needlessly suffered for an extended period of time because the doctor failed to properly evaluate tests or run tests that should have reasonably notified him or her of the potential diagnosis. Other examples of medical malpractice include misdiagnosing a medical condition, failing to provide appropriate treatment, causing an unreasonable delay in treating a diagnosed condition, violating HIPAA laws, performing wrong-site surgery and performing surgery on the wrong patient.

Have you been injured due to military hospital medical malpractice? Under United States tort law, federal employees are not personally liable for most torts they commit in the course of their work. Instead, you can only hold those employees responsible using a special law called the Federal Tort Claims Act. This includes Army, Navy, and Air Force hospitals.In some respects, FTCA cases are quite different from ordinary tort cases. In such a case, the injured party may not file a lawsuit against the government until he or she has exhausted all administrative remedies. The injured party must first file an administrative claim with the proper agency of the United States government within a limited amount of time. Whitehurst, Harkness, Brees, Cheng, Alsaffar, Higginbotham, and Jacob, PLLC, has experience in representing injured parties at the administrative claim stage and throughout trial in federal courts all over the United States.
Once a doctor initiates treatment of a patient, the doctor must not only terminate care at a proper time, but also in a proper manner. If a doctor transfers a patient to the care of a second doctor, the second doctor may not be familiar with crucial details of a patient's care. So, the first doctor has an ongoing obligation to provide the second doctor with proper instructions and all relevant records (treatment notes, test results, etc.). Failure to do so could rise to the level of medical malpractice.

As for your attempt to on the one hand to frame doctors as greedy drug dealers responsible for for most of this countries drug abuse, while at the same time trying to shame them into believing that theirs is a selfless avocation, some kind of priesthood where anyone not willing to martyr themselves to an ungrateful public, shouldn’t be able to practice. -Well i think you’d better put down whatever pills you’ve been swallowing, and come back to reality. Medicine is a profession, and its filled with human beings, not saints or demons. Human beings who will choose their own well being over that of a potential enemy every time just as YOU would. And greedy lawyers, unscrupulous patients, and unwitting juries all over this country are increasingly causing doctors to view their patients as potential enemies.


As fear over “spurious claims” grew, and the lucrative nature of malpractice payouts became clear, legislation began to account for the concept of shared fault in medical malpractice claims. Many states arrived at the conclusion that a medical professional was not always exclusively responsible for the injury incurred. The doctrines of contributory and comparative fault allow the jury to assess the claim and assign a correct amount of blame to plaintiff as well as the defendant. Allowing fault to be shared promotes responsibility for both parties.

Rather, the law only requires medical professionals to act according to the proper standard of care. If you have evidence that your doctor violated this standard when failing to diagnose your condition, then you may have a legitimate malpractice claim. Oftentimes, an expert witness will be called in to determine whether a medical professional did indeed violate his or her standard of care.

Other states require that you file an "affidavit of merit" (or a similarly-named document) with the court when you first begin the lawsuit. This is a sworn statement from a qualified medical expert testifying that you appear to have a valid case for medical malpractice. Once again, if you don’t provide the expert affidavit at the beginning of the case, the court will throw the lawsuit out. Depending on the state, there might be either a screening panel or an expert affidavit requirement or both or other similar requirements.
×