The Plaintiff's Medical Malpractice Lawyer's 10 Commandments
We have learned and experienced much in handling thousands of cases in our collective 50 years of representing victims of medical negligence in order to create our own 10 Commandments.
July 01, 2021 at 11:05 AM
6 minute read
While we may not possess the years that Moses reportedly had when he received the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai, we have learned and experienced much in handling thousands of cases in our collective 50 years of representing victims of medical negligence in order to create our own 10 Commandments, which follow.
- Do Not Accept a Case That You're Not Committed to Take to Trial.
Too many times, we've seen and heard from lawyers who tell us that they accepted a case expecting it to settle and when it didn't, they weren't prepared to see it through to trial. By that time, they were either woefully ill-prepared to try the case or had invested vast sums of time and money with no realistic expectation for success. Sadly, by that late date the die was cast and there wasn't much they could do. Conversely, it's critical to undertake a thorough investigation of the issues concerning standard of care, causation and damages, pre-suit. A certificate of merit and affidavit of merit from a competent, qualified and respectable expert is your best friend. You should be able, essentially, to present your case-in-chief following the completion of your pre-suit investigative work. If you're not, you're likely in for a much more uncertain path forward and a highly questionable result.
- Do Not Wait to File Suit.
Just because there is a two-year statute of limitations doesn't mean you should wait any longer than is absolutely necessary to file suit. The passage of time rarely benefits the plaintiff and her attorney. Justice delayed is justice denied. Your client will be most appreciative for your efficiency and so will you. Obtain the critical medical records as soon as possible after being retained, complete your pre-suit investigation and draft your complaint. It is much easier to discover and add additional defendants before rather than after the statute of limitations has run.
- Draft and File a Powerhouse Complaint.
Your complaint should tell your client's story. It should be detailed from a factual standpoint. It should specifically identify the allegations of negligence against each particular defendant in separate counts, as necessary. Your client's damages should be itemized specifically, as well, including compensatory past, present and future damages and punitive damages, if appropriate. Excerpts from medical records, statements, photographs and video should be included. Your Complaint should serve as your roadmap for future filings throughout the pendency of the case.
- Serve Initial Discovery and Notices of Depositions With Your Complaint.
This should include Interrogatories, request for production of documents, request for admissions (when appropriate) and notices of videotaped depositions for records custodians, corporate designees and defendants. This will send a strong message. You can resend them once counsel has entered her appearance. This will result in your ability to proceed with discovery in the order of your preference, including proceeding with the critical defendant's deposition before your client's deposition, if so warranted.
- Offer and Provide Dates for Your Client's Deposition.
The case is about your client. First impressions are important and go a long way. Normally, it's the first time counsel and any claims representative will see and meet your client. You may prefer to present your client for deposition before proceeding with the defendants' depositions. Its always preferable to control the order of the discovery process.
- File Discovery Motions.
Absent extraordinary circumstances, you should file prompt motions to compel, motions for more specific responses, motions to strike or motions for sanctions if the defendants' discovery responses are either untimely, inadequate or insufficient. The granting of extensions to provide discovery responses should be the exception rather than the rule.
- Obtain Admissible Trial Testimony During Depositions.
Depositions should be strategic and tactical. Your questions should not be objectionable. They should be clear, concise, short, direct, pointed and geared to elicit a one word response, if possible—either "yes" or "no," depending upon the subject matter. The goal is to be able to play back the Q&A as admissions of a party defendant in your case-in-chief in order to lock-in the defendant's testimony at the beginning of the case.
- Serve Requests for Admissions Following the Completion of Written Discovery and Depositions.
The audacious power of being able to stand up, face the jury and read to them the defendants' factual admissions at the beginning of your case-in-chief can neither be discounted nor minimized. In combination with the jury's hearing admissions of the party defendants obtained during their depositions, you may well have convinced the jury of the propriety of the case before questioning your first live witness.
- Prepare and Provide Both the Mediator and Defense Counsel With Extensive Mediation Memoranda.
Your mediation memoranda should be viewed as your complaint on steroids. It should be extensive, exhaustive, thorough and complete. It should include powerful video of the plaintiff, family, friends and deposition testimony. You should be certain to rebut each of the anticipated defenses in the case as you will likely not have the opportunity to view the defendants' materials. Also, you should provide defense counsel with enough copies for herself and any other decision makers as early as possible so that informed discussions may proceed before the mediation.
- Script the Trial.
Your most valuable asset is your time. Judges and juries are no different. Now more than ever, you must be respectful of everyone's time in the courtroom. Judges and juries expect your presentation to be organized, smooth and flowing. Have a schedule and stick to it and be sure to preview for the jury during your opening statement from whom and what they'll hear at trial. Remember, trial is live theatre. Know your case thoroughly and completely, practice and rehearse.
Michael F. Barrett and Joseph G. DeAngelo are the co-founders of Barrett DeAngelo, a boutique law firm concentrating in representing the victims of medical negligence in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Washington, D.C. and Delaware (by permission).
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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSuperior Court Rejects Pa. Hospital's Challenge to $7.3M Med Mal Judgment
3 minute readPa. Appeals Court: Trial Judge Dismissed Med Mal Claims Without Giving Plaintiffs Proper Time to Fight Back
4 minute readPa. Hospital Agrees to $16M Settlement Following High Schooler's Improper Discharge
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Intersection of Labor Law and Politics Following the Presidential Election
- 2Critical Mass With Law.com’s Amanda Bronstad: LA Judge Orders Edison to Preserve Wildfire Evidence, Is Kline & Specter Fight With Thomas Bosworth Finally Over?
- 3What Businesses Need to Know About Anticipated FTC Leadership Changes
- 4Federal Court Considers Blurry Lines Between Artist's Consultant and Business Manager
- 5US Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250