It is no secret that the prosecution of malpractice actions has become more challenging over the years. Jurors have been colored by decades of tort-reform propaganda. Mandatory pretrial disclosure of experts’ credentials results in exposure of their identities and efforts to deter them from testifying for plaintiffs. The same pressure may now be exerted on a plaintiff’s treating doctors by virtue of court-sanctioned ex parte interviews with defense counsel.
In recent years, however, more sinister tactics have been unleashed against malpractice victims, their advocates and their experts. Despite empirical data establishing that there are as many as 98,000 avoidable deaths per year throughout the United States as a result of medical negligence in hospitals alone,1 the medical establishment has been more focused on defeating lawsuits than it has on improving the quality of care.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
