The Medical Malpractice Litigation System

2021 ◽  
pp. 51-74
Author(s):  
Michael J. Saks ◽  
Stephan Landsman
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Great Majority ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Legal Response ◽  
System P ◽  
Litigation Process ◽  
Tort System

“The Medical Malpractice Litigation System” provides a description of the conventional legal response to negligent adverse events. First, it discusses the origins, nature, and purposes (usually given as compensation and deterrence) of the tort system; explains the economic analysis of tort law (including the concept of negligence), and describes some of the specialized rules that apply only to medical malpractice torts. Most of the chapter is a data-based walk-through of the stages of the malpractice litigation process, including the proportion of cases that enter and proceed through each stage: initiation of claims (including attorney screening), pretrial disposition, trials, verdicts, compensation awards, and adjustments following verdicts. The evidence shows that the great majority of negligently caused injuries never enter the system, trials are rare, and negotiation plays so great a part that the system is best characterized as one of “litigotiation.”

Medicolegal Issues in Pathology

2008 ◽  
Vol 132 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-191
Author(s):  
Timothy Craig Allen
Keyword(s):  
Medical Records ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Litigation Process ◽  
Risk Managers ◽  
Medicolegal Issues

Abstract The various methods used by risk managers to assist clinicians in handling medicolegal risk, including improving communication with patients and better dealing with medical records issues, are not particularly of benefit to pathologists. An understanding of tort law, the theory of negligence, the principle of standard of care, and the role of the expert witness helps the pathologist generally assess and manage risk and put it into context with daily pathology practice. An understanding of the litigation process and techniques to better handle a deposition and high-risk specimens or diagnoses are of practical value in avoiding a lawsuit or increasing the likelihood for good outcome in medical malpractice litigation.

The Anti-Patient Psychology of Health Courts: Prescriptions from a Lawyer-Physician

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 188-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Freeman L. Farrow
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
The United States ◽  
Specialized Knowledge ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Insurance Premiums ◽  
Malpractice Insurance ◽  
Malpractice Claims ◽  
Practice Of Medicine ◽  
Tort System ◽  
Medical Malpractice Insurance

Critics of the current medical malpractice tort system claim that adjudication of malpractice claims before generalist judges and lay juries contributes to rising costs of medical malpractice insurance premiums and medical care. They claim that properly deciding issues in this realm requires specialized knowledge of medicine and medical technology that juries, and even judges of general jurisdiction, do not possess. One lobbying group alleges there is a continuing medical malpractice litigation crisis in the United States, evidenced by increasing medical costs, deaths from needless medical errors, departure of physicians from the practice of medicine due to increasing medical malpractice insurance premiums, and random medical justice in medical malpractice cases. Whether there is a direct, causal correlation between the increasing cost of medical malpractice insurance premiums and medical malpractice litigation is debatable.

The Positive Economic Theory of Tort Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark F. Grady
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Positive Theory ◽  
Norman Conquest ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
System P ◽  
Tort System ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Fresh Insight

Tort law is part of the common law that originated in England after the Norman Conquest and spread throughout the world, including to the United States. It is judge-made law that allows people who have been injured by others to sue those who harmed them and collect damages in proper cases. Since its early origins, tort law has evolved considerably and has become a full-fledged “grown order,” like the economy, and can best be understood by positive theory, also like the economy. Economic theories of tort have developed since the early 1970s, and they too have evolved over time. Their objective is to generate fresh insight about the purposes and the workings of the tort system. The basic thesis of the economic theory is that tort law creates incentives for people to minimize social cost, which is comprised of the harm produced by torts and the cost of the precautions necessary to prevent torts. This thesis, intentionally simple, generates many fresh insights about the workings and effects of the tort system and even about the actual legal rules that judges have developed. In an evolved grown order, legal rules are far less concrete than most people would expect though often very clear in application. Beginning also in the 1970s, legal philosophers have objected to the economic theory of tort and have devised philosophical theories that compete. The competition, moreover, has been productive because it has spurred both sides to revise and improve their theories and to seek better to understand the law. Tort law is diverse, applicable to many different activities and situations, so developing a positive theory about it is both challenging and rewarding.

scholarly journals The, Of, For, In The Use of Amicable Settlement for Resolving Medical Malparctice in Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-134
Author(s):  
Muh Endriyo Susila
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Defensive Medicine ◽  
Health Care Setting ◽  
Hostile Environment ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Litigation Process ◽  
Injured Patients

Massive publicity on alleged medical malpractice cases has created hostile environment within the health care setting in Indonesia. The unexpected practice of defensive medicine would be possible in response to the rise of medical malpractice litigation. Although it has many negative implications, litigating medical malpractice dispute is preferable for many injured patients. Dispute resolution mechanisms should be introduced and promoted in Indonesia as an alternative to the litigation process with hope of providing redress to victims of medical malpractice in a more amicable manner. This paper aims at exploring the use of amicable settlement method for resolving medical malpractice disputes in Indonesia.

No-Fault Versus Strict Liability Compensation Systems in Medical Malpractice Law in Vietnam in Comparision with Belgium, France, and England

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thi Bao Anh Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Strict Liability ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Compensation System ◽  
Compensation Systems ◽  
Malpractice Law ◽  
Tort System ◽  
Pain And Suffering ◽  
Fault Compensation ◽  
Uniform Manner

Abstract Medical malpractice is a form of professional negligence and such a negligence forms part of the law of tort. As an alternative to the tort or fault-based system in medical malpractice, a no-fault compensation system has been viewed as having the potential to overcome problems inherent in the tort system. This is through the provision of fair, speedy and adequate compensation for medically injured victims. A no-fault compensation system allows patients to be compensated without proof of provider’s fault or negligence. Similar to no-fault schemes, the strict liability system is not fault-based although it belongs to tort law. Successful claims are paid in a uniform manner using a fixed benefits schedule and include compensation for both economic and non-economic (pain and suffering losses) without the necessity of proving negligence through a tort claim. This study focuses on the comparison of no-fault compensation systems versus strict liability systems between Vietnam to Belgium, France, and England. The distinctions in Belgium, France, and England can be the lessons for the development of a no-fault compensation system as well as strict liability system in Vietnam.

Relation between Negligent Adverse Events and the Outcomes of Medical-Malpractice Litigation

1996 ◽  
Vol 335 (26) ◽  
pp. 1963-1967 ◽  
Author(s):  
Troyen A. Brennan ◽  
Colin M. Sox ◽  
Helen R. Burstin
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Medical Malpractice ◽  
Malpractice Litigation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document