Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Medical Malpractice Law & StrategyLJN NewslettersNewsSections

Mistake of Judgment: Calling Out for Clarity

By J. Scott Kramer and Helena Ciechanowski
May 28, 2004

In medical malpractice cases, it is a matter of hornbook law that health care providers bear no liability for poor outcomes resulting from the exercise of professional judgment, as long as they adhere to the relevant standard of care. In an attempt to facilitate jurors' understanding of this concept, courts across the country have given “mistake” or “error-of-judgment” charges, which typically instruct the jury that physicians are entitled to exercise their professional judgment in choosing either of two reasonable options.

Originally, mistake-of-judgment charges were given in failure-to-diagnose cases where parties presented evidence about the existence of two or more equally viable alternatives for treatment or diagnosis. See Nestorowich v. Ricotta, 97 N.Y.2d 393, 400 (N.Y. 2002). This benign and legally appropriate charge has at times been manipulated into an exculpatory instruction for professional malfeasance, and is offered even in cases where the alleged negligence did not involve an error in judgment, but rather an error in the mechanism of treatment. See Nestorowich (discussing mistake-in-judgment charge erroneously given in case where the alleged negligence was a physician's mistake in ligating a renal artery that he thought was a vessel supplying blood to plaintiff's tumor). Defense attorneys often attempt to use the rule as a talisman throughout the case, masking professional negligence underneath the guise of professional judgment. See, e.g. Das v. Thani, 171 N.J. 518, 528-29, 795 A.2d 876, 883 (“Defense counsel, 'knowing the power of the judgment charge, took every opportunity to lead the court and jury into thinking that the entire case revolved around the exercise of judgment'.”).

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.