Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Medical Malpractice Law & StrategyKickerFeaturesTopicsLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Are Juries Fair to Physicians?

By Linda S. Crawford
August 27, 2008

Medical malpractice cases are high-stakes events. Although defendants continue to prevail in two-thirds of trials, when the plaintiff wins, the median amount of the verdict is $1.2 million; and developing information indicates that that figure is rising at an alarming rate. See, e.g., Jury Verdict Research, LPR Publications, Horsham, PA, 2003, 2005. According to the National Practitioner Data Bank, there were 17,298 medical malpractice payments made in 2005, either in settlement or after verdict, with a median payment of $174,569 for physicians; obstetrical case payments had a median of $300,000. National Practitioner Data Bank 2005 Annual Report, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Heath Resources and Services Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Suite 84-55, Rockville, MD 20857, pg 23. Given how large the awards are when there is a verdict against a physician, many in the medical profession and their defense teams have come to believe that juries are random and unfair. The conventional wisdom seems to be that judge-made decisions are a safer bet for med-mal defendants. Is this true?

Comparing Medical Malpractice Verdicts and Other Verdicts

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.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.