How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

Bringing a medical malpractice suit against a doctor or hospital requires proof that the defendant has violated his or her duty to patients. This could include hospital and medical records.

Our attorneys have extensive experience in taking depositions that are effective. They could be doctors, other medical professionals in private practice, or working at a hospital or clinic.

Negligence

Patients have the right to be treated with respect to certain standards when they visit a doctor, hospital, or health care professional. However, in a few instances these standards are not met, or even violated. The results of this breach can be devastating.

When someone suffers injury or death due to a doctor's malpractice, they may sue the medical professional. In order to file a valid claim, the patient must prove that four legal elements exist such as breach of duty, causation, and damages.

Malpractice can be defined as an action by the doctor that is against the accepted norms in the medical field and can cause injury to a patient. It is an aspect of tort law which covers civil wrongs that aren't contractual duties or criminal offenses.

Medical negligence is distinct from regular negligence in that the victim must prove that the doctor was aware or ought to have known that their actions could cause harm in order to assert malpractice, however normal negligence is not required. For example, a surgeon who accidentally cut a vein or nerve during surgery could be considered negligent, but not malpractice since the surgeon did not intend to cause harm.

In an instance of medical malpractice the defendant's responsibility is to treat the patient according with the standard of care a prudent health care professional of similar experience and education would provide in similar circumstances. The breach of duty is important because it proves that the negligent act caused the injury.

Damages

The damages in a malpractice case are determined by the losses you have suffered as a result of a doctor's negligence. This could include financial losses, such as future medical expenses, as well as non-economic losses like pain and discomfort.

In order to recover damages, you must show that the doctor violated the duty of care, that the doctor's deviation from the standard resulted in injury, and that the injury caused quantifiable financial consequences. This is a complicated legal process that usually requires expert witness testimony.

Some of these losses are obvious for instance, if your doctor made an error that caused an infection or other medical problem that required additional treatment because of it. Some damages are more difficult to identify, such as when a doctor misdiagnoses your condition and you do not receive the correct treatment.

You can sue for wrongful death when a doctor's negligence caused your death. In these claims, you are entitled to everything you would have gotten in a lawsuit for survival, plus punitive damages.

In most states, there are limits on the amount you can recover in a malpractice case. These caps differ from state to state and are often applicable to both economic and other damages. Certain states have laws that limit the time you can delay before filing a lawsuit.

Time Limits

As with any lawsuit, there are specific deadlines which must be adhered to or the case will be barred. In general, a malpractice lawsuit must be filed within two to six years from the medical malpractice occurring. The exact time frame is different for each state.

It is important to consult an attorney as soon as possible. The law firm will conduct an investigation to determine if malpractice was committed and if it could be found to be valid in the court. This can take months or even weeks.

Medical malpractice cases are subject to different laws and the statute of limitation is often altered. In Pennsylvania the patient is entitled to two years from the date that they discovered the negligence. This is referred to as the discovery rule.

In other states the statute of limitations begins at the time the malpractice occurred. This could be problematic if the medical malpractice does not cause any immediate symptoms. Consider, for instance, that a doctor mistakenly left a foreign body in the patient's body after surgery. The patient may not realize the object until three years after the procedure. In this situation, the statutes of limitations could have been in the year following the date of the procedure, not necessarily the moment of identifying the error.

Expert Witnesses

Expert witnesses are often called upon to clarify the facts in medical malpractice attorney cases. A plaintiff's expert witness will testify about the doctor's duty of providing medical care to the patient, the medical standards in the region and specialization for doctors with similar qualifications and expertise and the ways the defendant violated those standards. The expert will explain how the deviation directly led to the injury of the patient.

The defendant will engage an expert to counter the plaintiff's expert and give their professional opinion on whether or malpractice not the doctor met the standards of care. The experts could disagree, but the fact-finder decides which expert is most trustworthy.

It is best for the expert to continue working in the medical profession since they are more informed about current practice. Judges and jurors are likely to consider professionals who are practicing more credible than experts who rely solely on court testimony.

It is also preferable to have an expert witness that is specialized in the area of the negligence. For instance an expert in medicine who is well versed in treating breast cancer could make a a more convincing argument about the cause of the plaintiff's injuries. A medical malpractice lawyer in Ocala knows which experts to ask.