How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

A medical malpractice lawsuit (check out this one from shinhwaspodium.com) against a doctor or hospital requires evidence that the defendant acted in breach of his or her duty to patients. This evidence could include hospital and medical documents.

Our lawyers have years of experience in conducting effective depositions. They could be doctors or other medical professionals in private practice, or employees at a hospital or clinic.

Negligence

If a patient is seen by a doctor or hospital professional and receives medical care, they are entitled certain standards of medical care. Unfortunately they aren't always adhered to or even observed. The results of this breach could be devastating.

A lawsuit can be filed against a medical professional if the patient is injured or dies because of the negligence of the physician. In order to file a valid claim, the injured patient must prove that there are four legal elements in place which include breach of duty, causation and damages.

Malpractice is defined as an act committed by doctors that goes against the norms of the medical profession and causes injury to a patient. It is a part of tort law, which is concerned with civil wrongs not criminal offenses or contractual duties.

Medical negligence differs from normal negligence in that the injured party must prove that the doctor was aware, or should have known that their actions were going to cause harm before they can claim malpractice. Normal negligence doesn't. A surgeon who accidentally nicks or cuts one of the nerves or veins during surgery is guilty of negligence but not negligence. This is because the surgeon did not intend to hurt anyone.

In the case of medical negligence the defendant's responsibility is to treat the patient according with the standard of care that a qualified health professional with similar experience and training could provide in similar situations. The breach of duty is significant because it proves that the alleged negligence caused the injury.

Damages

In a case of malpractice damages are calculated based upon your losses as a result a doctor's negligence. This could include financial losses, such as future medical expenses, as well as non-economic damages such as pain and discomfort.

In order to obtain damages, it is necessary to demonstrate that a doctor did not fulfill the law and that his deviance from the standard of care led to injuries, and that the injury resulted in measurable financial costs. This is a complicated legal analysis that typically requires expert witness testimony.

Certain of these losses can be spotted quickly, for example, if a doctor's mistake led to an infection, or other medical complications that required further treatment. Some damages are more difficult to see for instance, when an expert misdiagnoses your illness and you don't receive the correct treatment.

If your doctor's malpractice causes your death and you are unable to sue, you may be able to sue for the wrongful death. In these claims you're entitled to the same amount you would have gotten in a survival lawsuit and punitive damages.

In a majority of states, there are limits on what you can claim in a malpractice case. These caps vary from state to state and are generally applicable to both economic and other damages. Certain states have laws that limit the time you can wait before filing a lawsuit.

Time Limits

Like any lawsuit, there are time limits which must be observed or the case may be barred. Generally speaking, a malpractice lawsuit must be filed within two to six months of the medical malpractice that occurred. The time limit differs by state.

The time frame can be complicated and it is important to consult with an attorney right away. The law firm will conduct an investigation to determine whether a mistake was committed and if it could hold up in court. This can take up to a few weeks or even months.

Medical malpractice cases are governed by different laws and the statute of limitation is often modified. For instance, in Pennsylvania the patient must make a claim within two years from the time they realized the malpractice or the date a reasonable person should have realized the injury existed. This is known as the discovery rule.

In other states, the statute of limitations starts to run from the date the malpractice occurred. This could be an issue if the error does not immediately cause symptoms. For instance, suppose that a doctor negligently leaves an object foreign to the body after surgery. The patient may not realize the object until three years after the procedure. In this scenario the statute of limitations could have been beginning from the date of surgery rather than the moment of discovery.

Expert Witnesses

Expert witnesses are often required to explain facts in medical malpractice cases. An expert witness for the plaintiff will testify on the doctor's duty to the patient, medical standards for doctors who have similar qualifications in the field and specialty and the ways in which the defendant departed from the standard. The expert will then explain how the deviance directly contributed to the patient's injury.

The defendant will employ an expert to challenge the plaintiff's expert and provide their professional opinion on whether or not the doctor was able to provide the required care. It is common for experts to differ with each and yet the factfinder determines who is most credible based on their knowledge and experience.

It is preferential for the expert to still be working in the medical field, because they will have more knowledge of the current practice. Jurors and judges often find practicing professionals more credible than experts whose only source of income is testimony in court.

It is also advisable to have an expert witness who specializes in the field of legal malpractice. For instance a medical professional who is proficient in treating breast cancer can provide an argument that is more convincing about the cause of the plaintiff's injury. A medical malpractice lawyer in Ocala will know which experts to ask.