CHICAGO ATTORNEY ONLINE.COM

According to politicians and the media it is really easy to sue a doctor. How often do doctors win at trial?

Q.     According to politicians and the media, it is really easy to sue a doctor.  How often do doctors win at trial?

A.     Most people are shocked to know the true statistics.  It would be reasonable to assume, based upon the statements and arguments of politicians, transmitted through the media without analysis or consideration, that nine out of 10 Plaintiffs win their medical malpractice lawsuits.  When I ask the average person, they generally say 50/50.  Across the country that is not so, and even in Cook County where I practice it has never been close to that.  In fact, right now doctors are winning nearly 8 out of 10 jury trials in Cook County.  Historically, doctors win about 2/3 of the cases which are tried. 

Besides being statistically difficult to beat doctors at trial, it is expansive.  Medical malpractice cases require expert testimony at trial from a similarly situated physician, as well as consultants and other expensive preparation.  Moreover, unlike any other type of suit, attorneys fees on medical malpractice cases are capped.  In summary, you have a case that is more likely to lose then any other type of case, with more expenses than any other type of case, with a capped fee.  One does not have these obstacles in suing a lawyer, truck driver or anyone else for that matter.

So, in summary, no, it is not easy to collect from doctors when they are negligent.  In fact, most any Plaintiffs lawyer, as well as prominent medical journals, will tell you that there is far more medical malpractice then there are recoveries.  Given the odds and statistics shown above, it is difficult to take a case that is not of very significant value.  Since most medical malpractice cases involve a contingency fee for the Plaintiff’s attorney, he or she is not going to take the case unless a return can be made upon the significant investment of time, money and energy.  Contrary to what you may have heard, Plaintiff’s lawyers do not file frivolous lawsuits.  Would you spend your time and money prosecuting a case where the odds are against you?  Not if you wanted to stay in business for very long.

   

Below is a link to the Cook County jury verdict’s research and statistics on this issue, which many will find very interesting, and contrary to the frequent statements from the media and politicians.

http://www.lawbulletin.com/assets/documents/8540%20ILJVR%20article.pdf

Tom Paris, Chicago Attorney 
312/759-1600
312/201-1436(fax)

Tags: chicago+attorney, suing+a+doctor

 

Disclaimer:

The information, comments and links posted on this blog do not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship has been or will be formed by any communication(s) to, from or with the blog and/or the blogger. For legal advice, contact Thomas M. Paris or an attorney actively practicing in your jurisdiction. Do not send any confidential or privileged information to the blogger; as Thomas M. Paris will not assume any liability or responsibility for it. If you send any information, documents or materials to the blog, you give permission for the blogger to include them on or in the blog. No information, documents or materials you send to the blog will be considered confidential or privileged by Thomas M. Paris. Also, no such information, documents or materials will be returned to you.

I recently got my ears pierced, can I sue?

I recently got my ears pierced at the mall and ended up with an infection and had to have three minor surgeries as a result.  I also missed a week of work.  I signed a waiver of liability when getting my ears pierced, do I still have the right to sue for medical expenses and lost wages?

 

Answer:

 

Good question.  A release certainly could be effective in some situations (paint ball, hang gliding or parachuting come to mind), however, this is somewhat along the lines of a medical procedure, and an "exculpatory clause" certainly would not be effective in those situations if there was negligence.  You must still prove that the professional did something that a reasonably competent professional in the field would not do, or didn't do something which a professional in the field would have done.  Of course you would need to hire such an "expert witness" for that purpose.  The defendant would likely blame you for not following instructions, or as Drs. often do, simply say it was a "bad result" and they did everything right.  I call this the sh*t happens defense, and while I poke fun at it, it can be remarkably effective, as the statistics on this link show for recent IL verdicts.    http://www.lawbulletin.com/assets/documents/8540%20ILJVR%20article.pdf   Tom Paris, Chicago Attorney  312/759-1600 312/201-1436(fax)   Disclaimer: The information, comments and links posted on this blog do not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship has been or will be formed by any communication(s) to, from or with the blog and/or the blogger. For legal advice, contact Thomas M. Paris or an attorney actively practicing in your jurisdiction. Do not send any confidential or privileged information to the blogger; as Thomas M. Paris will not assume any liability or responsibility for it. If you send any information, documents or materials to the blog, you give permission for the blogger to include them on or in the blog. No information, documents or materials you send to the blog will be considered confidential or privileged by Thomas M. Paris. Also, no such information, documents or materials will be returned to you.