How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit
A medical malpractice lawsuit against a hospital or doctor requires proof that the defendant breached his or her obligation to patients. This evidence may include hospital and medical documents.
Our attorneys are experienced at taking effective depositions of witnesses. They could be doctors or
Lawsuit other medical professionals in private practice or work at a hospital or clinic.
Negligence
Patients have a right to be treated with respect to certain standards when they visit a hospital, doctor or health care professional. However, in a few instances these standards are not being met or even violated. The results of this breach could be devastating.
A lawsuit can be filed against a medical professional if patients are injured or dies due to the malpractice of that doctor. To have a legitimate claim, the injured patient must prove that four legal elements exist such as breach of duty, causation and damages.
Malpractice is described as an act performed by doctors that goes against the norms of the medical profession and results in harm to the patient. It is a component of tort law, which is concerned with civil wrongs not criminal offenses or contractual duties.
Medical negligence is distinct from regular negligence because the victim must prove that the physician was aware or
lawsuit ought to have known that their actions would cause harm to assert malpractice, however normal negligence doesn't. For example an surgeon who accidentally cut a vein or nerve during surgery could be considered negligent, but not malpractice because the doctor didn't intend to cause harm.
In a case of medical malpractice the defendant is under a legal obligation to treat the patient according to the standard of care that a reasonably prudent healthcare professional with comparable knowledge and experience in similar circumstances would offer. The breach of duty is significant because it shows that the alleged negligence caused the injury.
Damages
In a malpractice lawsuit, damages are dependent on the losses you sustained as a result of the negligence of a doctor. These could include both financial loss such as the costs of future medical treatment as well as non-economic losses like suffering and pain.
In order to recover damages, you have to prove that the doctor violated a duty of care, that the doctor's deviation from the norm resulted in injury, and the injury was measurable in terms of financial consequences. This is a difficult legal analysis that typically requires expert witness testimony.
Some of these losses are obvious for instance, if a doctor made an error that led to an infection or other medical problem that required additional treatment because of it. Other damages are less readily evident, like when your doctor is unable to diagnose you correctly, and you aren't able to receive the appropriate treatment.
You can sue for wrongful death if your doctor's negligence causes your death. In these claims, you are entitled to everything you would have received in a survival lawsuit and punitive damages.
In a majority of states, there is a limit on what you can receive in a malpractice case. These limits vary from state to state and usually apply to both economic and non-economic damages. Some states also have rules that limit the time you have to wait to file a
lawsuit.
Time Limits
Like any lawsuit, there are deadlines that must be adhered to or the case could be thrown out. A malpractice lawsuit should generally be filed between two and six years after the incident occurred. The time frame varies by state.
It is essential to speak with an attorney as soon as possible. The law firm will investigate to determine if there was any malpractice and whether the case will stand up in the court. This phase can last for months or even weeks.
Medical malpractice cases are subject to different laws and the statute of limitation is frequently altered. For example, in Pennsylvania the patient has to file a claim within two years from the date they discovered the malpractice or the date a reasonable person should have realized the injury existed. This is called the discovery rule.
In other states, the statute of limitations starts to run from the date the malpractice occurred. This is problematic if the medical error doesn't cause immediate symptoms. For example, suppose an unintentionally negligent doctor leaves an object foreign to the body after surgery. The patient may not be aware of the object until three years after the surgery. In this situation the statute of limitations may have started beginning from the date of the surgery, not the moment of identifying the error.
Expert Witnesses
Expert witnesses are frequently called upon to explain the facts in medical
malpractice lawyers cases. Expert witnesses for plaintiffs will provide testimony regarding the doctor's duty of taking care of the patient, the medical standards in the area and in the specialty of the type of doctor with similar qualifications and expertise and the manner in which the defendant violated the standards. The expert will then explain how the deviation directly led to the patient's injury.
The defendant will engage an expert to challenge the plaintiff's expert and provide their professional opinion as to whether the doctor met the standards of care. It is common for experts to differ with each and yet the fact finder determines who is the most trustworthy based on their expertise and experience.
It is advisable for the expert to continue working in the medical field because they are more informed about current practice. Jurors and judges often consider professionals who are practicing more credible than experts whose only source of income is the testifying in court.
It is also better to work with an expert who specializes in the field of malpractice. A medical expert with prior experience treating breast cancer for example, can make an argument that is convincing regarding the reason for an injury. A medical malpractice lawyer in Ocala knows which experts to ask.