free
hit counter
Medical Malpractice Court Cases | Medical Malpractice Florida

Your attorney should also disclose “bad facts” in the opening statement.[20] A bad fact is anything the defense would want to bring to the jury’s attention because it makes the defense case much stronger. For example, your failure to follow your doctor’s prescribed treatment is a bad fact. By disclosing bad facts first, your attorney can take the sting out of them.
Many people are shocked to learn that doctors and hospitals frequently fail to disclose important information to patients, sometimes intentionally. Sometimes the failure to disclose info relates to mistakes a doctor or hospital made, sometimes it’s about test results, and sometimes doctors are just trying to prevent needless worrying. However, if a patient is harmed or injured as a result of a doctor or hospital’s failure to communicate medical information, such as test results, then they may be liable for malpractice.
Medical malpractice cases almost always require medical experts to testify about the proper standard of care that should have been provided under the circumstances. These are often physicians who practice within the same type of medicine that the physician defendant practices in. These individuals are usually tasked with the responsibility of explaining that the defendant deviated from the standard of care and that this deviation resulted in the patient suffering the harm alleged in the complaint.
Despite that fact that the Constitution promises you the right to health care, no one has successfully sued the State for the non-delivery or lack of health care. Several test cases have concluded that, despite the Constitution and the Patients’ Rights Charter, the government has no absolute obligation to provide access to health care. Instead, the government is required to “progressively realise its obligations” to its citizens. In practical terms, this means, for example, that a patient who needs dialysis and cannot be treated because of a lack of facilities cannot sue the State.
Among the acts or omissions that may potentially support a medical malpractice claim are the failure to properly diagnose a disease or medical condition, the failure to provide appropriate treatment for a medical condition, and unreasonable delay in treating a diagnosed medical condition.[7] In some jurisdictions a medical malpractice action may be allowed even without a mistake from the doctor, based upon principles of informed consent, where a patient was not informed of possible consequences of a course of treatment and would have declined the medical treatment had proper information been provided in advance.[7]
Regarding Moviedoc's comment, "Treating a rape victim must you tell them you were raped by your brother when you were 10?"...This is probably a bit too much information. However, telling a rape victim that you (the treating therapist or Psychiatrist) are a survivor of rape is often very helpful! Rape victims often think that no one understands, and that they can not survive. Having someone right in front of them who has experienced the same thing and survived it, is therapeutic. It should never be confabulated though, either true, or not said.
Cause: The link between a person’s act or failure to act and the resulting injury to the plaintiff. Imagine that a nurse practitioner did not record on the chart a patient’s current medications. If this led to a doctor prescribing a drug that was contraindicated with drugs the patient was already taking, the nurse practitioner’s inaction caused any resulting harm to the patient.
Because many malpractice cases involve patients that were already sick or injured, there is often a question of whether what the doctor did – the treatment of the preexisting condition – actually caused the harm. If a patient dies of pancreatic cancer after seeking medical treatment, it might be difficult to prove that the doctor caused the patient’s death and not the cancer. The patient must show that it is “more likely than not“ that the doctor’s incompetence directly caused the injury. This often requires that a patient have a medical expert testify that the doctor’s negligence caused the injury.
There’s no way to tell how often doctors to lie to protect their colleagues, but ProPublica has found that patients are frequently not told the truth when they are harmed. Studies also show that many physicians do not have a favorable view of informing patients about mistakes and that health care workers are afraid to speak up if things don’t seem right. Many doctors and nurses have told ProPublica that they fear retaliation if they speak out about patient safety problems.
In the past, a lawyer acting for a wronged patient might have advised his or her client first to report the matter to the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA), the professional body mandated to register health professionals and ensure practitioners are fit to practise, before proceeding with a civil case in the courts. Even though the HPCSA does not have the power to arbitrate on compensation, the rationale was that an HPCSA ruling and censure of the doctors concerned would improve the chances of a patient succeeding in a civil case.
Jason Konvicka: Medical malpractice occurs when a health-care provider deviates from the recognized “standard of care” in the treatment of a patient. The “standard of care” is defined as what a reasonably prudent medical provider would or would not have done under the same or similar circumstances. In essence, it boils down to whether the provider was negligent.

A hospital can be held liable for the negligence of its employees. Typically,  nurses are hospital employees. And in some cases, medical technicians and paramedics are also employed by a hospital. As long as the employee was doing something job-related when he or she injured the patient (who would be the plaintiff in the case), the plaintiff can sue the hospital over the injury.
At trial the jury found in favor of the doctor because even the plaintiff's expert couldn't say that the complications were the direct result of improperly performed surgery. Even properly done surgery of this type carried the risk of perforation, bleeding and infection. The plaintiff also alleged that the doctor failed to give her informed consent because he gave false information about his personal background. The trial court wouldn't allow the informed consent issue to be raised because in Wisconsin the law only required that physicians tell patients the material risks of proposed treatment. There was no affirmative duty to disclose professional background information even when asked.
While some diagnostic errors may be seen as reasonable, patient harm that stems from inadequate communication could be the result of negligence on the part of medical providers. Every case is different, and the strength of yours is in the details. To have those details reviewed by an experienced medical malpractice lawyer, contact The Tinker Law Firm, PLLC. Call us today or fill out our online contact form for a free claim evaluation.
It is possible, however, to commit a criminal homicide based on wanton or reckless behavior. In other words, if someone acts with such disregard for the safety of others that death or serious injury is almost a given, this is often enough for certain types of criminal charges. However, doctors and other medical professionals are highly trained, very knowledgeable individuals. They are heavily regulated to prevent those with serious problems like substance abuse or mental disorders from causing harm. They are also under constant scrutiny and required to undergo continuing education to ensure that they are not engaging in techniques that could imperil a patient's life.
In Michigan, you must file a medical malpractice lawsuit to sue a hospital within two years of the date of the medical malpractice or medical negligence. There are only a very few number of exceptions to this rule so it is important to consult with an experienced medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. If you miss a deadline, your claim will be lost forever.
For instance, a boy named William Parr was born with a lump in his leg that was diagnosed as a tumor when he was eight years old. Doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital performed a procedure to remove it. But a complication occurred during the procedure that resulted in a burn, which caused significant pain, refused to heal and became infected. The medical team tried for some time to fix the problem, but eventually the boy’s leg had to be amputated.
At my surgery I rang at 8oclock am got through at 8.05to make an appointment to see a woman doctor only to be told that there were no women doctors available so I asked for a male doctor to which the reply from the receptionist was we have no male doctors either to which I replied if you do not get me an appointment I am writing to my local MP with that she had a sit and wait app with a women doc.
Many medical procedures are inherently risky and even under the most expert care can have bad outcomes. In these cases, doctors are obliged to explain the possible risks of a procedure to you before the procedure, and you must give your informed consent. Doctors need to have efficient and accurate record-keeping processes in order to defend themselves from malpractice litigation. Absent or poor record keeping is classified as professional negligence.

This is often the most difficult part of medical negligence cases and even lawyers have trouble getting their heads around it sometimes.  You may be able to prove that a doctor did the wrong thing, but you also have to prove that what happened next was the result of that wrong thing and you have to prove that it would not have happened if the wrong thing had not been done.  Deciding whether or not this is the case involves both factual and legal issues and is sometimes very hard to do.  You really need a lawyer who is highly experienced in medical negligence cases to look at this for you.
A word of caution on the types of medical errors described below: Keep in mind that just because a doctor made a mistake or a patient was unhappy with a course of treatment or its outcome, that doesn't mean malpractice necessarily occurred. In order to meet the legal definition of medical malpractice, the doctor or medical provider must have been negligent in some way -- meaning the doctor was not reasonably skillful or competent, and that incompetence harmed the patient. (To learn more about what does and does not constitute medical malpractice, see Nolo's article Medical Malpractice Basics.)
Proximate cause consists of finding of causation in fact, i. e., substantial cause, and absence of public policy rule of law which prohibits imposition of liability. In determining whether negligence was substantial factor in causing harm, substantial factor test applies to event which results in injury, not injury itself, and injury need only flow directly from event.

Recently I've been trying to get my medications reduced. When I switched Dr.'s he could not believe the medications and does the previous Dr. had me on. Currently, I am taking (100 mg X 2 of Zoloft), (0.1 X 3 of Clonidine), (2mg X 3 per day Xanax), (300mg X 1 Seroquel XR). These medications have been increased or were prescribed in this amount and after being rushed to the Hospital after what the Doctors believe was a seizure or mild stroke my wife started looking into the interactions of my medications and I was taken off of (Wellbutrin XL 300), (Hydroxyzine PAM 50mg X 2 per day), (Vyvanse 60mg), (Temazepam 30mg), (Duloxetine 60mg).
Hospital negligence can result in a number of unfortunate and often preventable injuries, including falls, preventable birth injuries, misdiagnosis of a condition, or serious infections. The team at Hodes Milman understands the consequences of hospital negligence and where the systematic breakdown occurred in order to define and prove your case. Injuries sustained from medical negligence in a hospital setting can be permanent, negatively impacting the victim’s life or necessitating lifelong medical care.

In order to have a malpractice claim, your medical professional must have acted negligently. This is to say that your doctor failed to treat you with a standard of care. A standard of care is the agreed upon method or methods employed by medical providers in the given geographic area for a condition or illness. This standard changes depending on a number of factors, including the age of the patient and the condition being treated.
No matter your jurisdiction, medical malpractice claims and lawsuits are primarily about one thing: accountability. People trust that doctors will take care of them and make their condition better in a patient’s hour of need. When doctors fail in that responsibility, they must be held accountable for the negligent actions they took – as well as for the actions that they failed to take under the circumstances.

The most common complaint, when these conflicts arise, is that people feel like they’re not being heard or understood, says George Blackall, PsyD, author of Breaking the Cycle: How to Turn Conflict Into Collaboration When You and Your Patients Disagree and professor of pediatrics and humanities at Penn State University College of Medicine in Hershey, Pa.

Some medical malpractice claims arise from mistakes made in the operating room. A surgeon might be negligent during the operation itself (puncturing internal organs, operating on the wrong body part, or leaving surgical instruments in the body) or the nursing staff might be negligent in administering post-op care (which could result in complications like serious infection).

It is possible that there are issues lurking here of insurance bias, racism, or anything else we can imagine. But even if that were true, none of those factors will matter. The physician's stated reason for failing to affirmatively cause that drug to be furnished to you is conclusive and, once he realized that, and absolutely once he stated that, there was no alternative course of conduct other than his refusal.

It is possible that there are issues lurking here of insurance bias, racism, or anything else we can imagine. But even if that were true, none of those factors will matter. The physician's stated reason for failing to affirmatively cause that drug to be furnished to you is conclusive and, once he realized that, and absolutely once he stated that, there was no alternative course of conduct other than his refusal.
However, our legal system is set up in such a way where monetary damages is not only a way to compensate persons for lost wages, medical bills, and pain and suffering; it is also there as a way to hold doctors accountable for their actions. Without the threat of monetary sanctions and lawsuits, doctors would lose some motivation for conducting their professional lives in a careful and cautious manner. Furthermore, if you doctor did negligently injure you or a loved one, bringing suit against him may serve as a wakeup call and could possibly prevent him from injuring someone else in the future.
×