How to File a Medical Malpractice Case
A malpractice case is one where medical professionals fail to treat a patient in line with the accepted standards of care. Medical malpractice can be committed by an orthopedic surgeon who commits a mistake during surgery and damages nerves in the femoral region.
Duty of care
The doctor-patient relationship has the obligation of care all medical professionals must fulfill in their job. That work includes taking reasonable steps to avoid injury and to cure or ease the symptoms of a patient’s illness. The doctor should also inform the patient about any risks that may arise from treatment or procedure. A doctor who fails to inform the patient about risks that are known to the profession could be held responsible for negligence.
If a medical professional fails to meet their duty of care, they can be held accountable for negligence and must compensate damages to the plaintiff. To prove this aspect of the case, it has to be proven that the defendant’s actions or inaction fell below the standard that other medical professionals would have performed in similar circumstances. This is typically established through expert testimony.
A medical professional who is familiar with the practice relevant to the case and the types of tests that should be conducted to diagnose the condition can declare that the defendant’s conduct breached the standard of care for the specific illness or condition. They can also explain in plain terms to a juror why the standard was violated.
Some medical experts are not qualified to handle malpractice cases, so a good attorney should be able to locate and work with the appropriate expert witnesses. In more complicated cases, the expert may need to provide complete reports and be available to testify at the court.
Breach of duty
All malpractice cases are built on defining a standard of care, and proving that the medical professional did not adhere to the standard. This is typically done by getting expert evidence from doctors with similar qualifications, training and expertise as the negligent physician.
The norm of care is basically what other medical professionals in your situation would offer to treat you. Doctors are accountable to their patients with a duty of care to always act sensibly and with a degree of caution when treating a patient. The duty of care also carries over to their loved family members. However, this doesn’t mean that medical professionals are not required to act as good Samaritans in and outside of the hospital.
If a medical professional does not fulfill his or her duty of care, and you suffer harm the medical professional is responsible for the injuries. In addition the plaintiff must demonstrate that their injury was directly attributed to the breach. If, for instance, the defendant surgeon is not reading the chart of their patient and operates on the incorrect leg, causing an injury, this is likely negligence.
It is important to remember that it may be difficult to show the direct source of your injury. For instance when the surgical sponge was left behind after a gallbladder surgery, it’s hard to demonstrate that the patient’s problems were directly caused by the surgery.
Causation
A doctor is only liable for negligence if a patient is able to prove that the doctor’s negligence caused the injury. This is known as “cause”. It is important to note that a negative outcome of the treatment isn’t necessarily medical malpractice (similar web site). The plaintiff must also prove that the doctor did not adhere to the standard of care which is typically followed in similar cases.
It is the doctor’s responsibility to inform the patient of the risks and potential outcomes of a procedure, as well as the rate of success. If a patient has not been adequately informed about the potential risks, they may have chosen to opt out of the procedure and opt for an alternative. This is referred to as the duty of informed consent.
The framework of the legal system that handles medical malpractice cases grew out of English common law in the 19th century. It is governed by various state statutes and court decisions.
The procedure of suing a doctor involves filing an official complaint, or summons in a state court. The document outlines the allegations of wrongdoing and demands compensation for injuries caused by the actions of the physician. The attorney for the plaintiff has to schedule an oath-taking deposition with the doctor who is defendant that allows the plaintiff to testify. The deposition will be recorded and used as evidence in the trial.
Damages
A patient who believes a doctor has committed medical malpractice lawsuit can sue in the court. The plaintiff must prove that there are four components to an action for malpractice that is valid which include a legal obligation to perform a task within the guidelines of the field, a breach of the duty, an injury caused by this breach and damages that could be reasonably connected to the injuries.
Medical malpractice cases require expert testimony. In most cases, the attorney for the defendant will participate in discovery, where the parties request written interrogatories or requests for production of documents. These are queries and requests for tangible evidence which the opposing party must be able to answer under oath. This process could be a lengthy and drawn-out one, and the attorneys from both sides will be able to present experts to be witnesses.
The plaintiff should also demonstrate that negligence caused substantial damages. This is because it could be expensive to pursue a malpractice case. A lawsuit might not be worth the expense if the damages are minor. Additionally, the amount of the damages must be greater than the cost of filing the suit. It is imperative that a patient consults with an Board Certified legal malpractice lawyer prior to filing a suit. When a trial is over either the winning or losing party can appeal the decision of the lower court. In the event of an appeal the higher court will review the evidence to determine whether the lower court committed mistakes in law or in the facts.