In our last post, we began speaking a bit about the rules of evidence in medical malpractice cases. Our discussion is specifically about physician admissions of fault and their place in medical malpractice cases. As we’ve noted, Michigan law prevents medical malpractice plaintiffs from using a physician’s sympathetic communications against him or her in court.
In our last post, we looked very briefly at a Michigan law which protects sympathetic physician communications from being used in court. Such statements are not necessarily critical for proving medical negligence, though, and the law does not protect physician admissions of fault or negligence from being used against them in medical malpractice litigation.
Last time, we mentioned that Michigan is among a group of state that have passed measures to protect physicians from having their apologies used against them in medical malpractice litigation. In this post, we wanted to say a bit more about this law and how it can affect an injured patient’s ability to build a strong case for negligence.
A recent CNN article took a look at what is becoming an increasingly important issue in the medical profession—the power of physician apologies when mistakes have been made. It has been known for some time that adding a touch of transparency and sincerity can go a long way in managing medical malpractice litigation, and 36 states currently have laws promoting physician apologies.
In our previous post, we began looking at medical malpractice as one important form of regulation of the medical industry. Malpractice litigation provides regulation of the medical profession through—or with reference to—the court system, even when cases settle outside the adversarial process.
The medical profession is a highly regulated one, and for good reasons. Licensed physicians bear a major responsibility to their patients, and regulation and oversight helps ensure—or, at least, is supposed to—that the individuals in the profession are deemed to be generally competent and trustworthy.
Pursuing a medical malpractice claim is generally a large undertaking involving a lot of leg work and a lot of coordination. Not only are there evidentiary and legal issues that need to be fully explored and considered, there are procedural and technical issues that have to be dealt with and coordinated as well.
Earlier this month, a Michigan Appeals Court ruled that the family of a deceased man who had a surgical sponge left inside of his body, near his heart, for eight years, is able to sue the doctor and the hospital where the surgery occurred.
In our last post, we mentioned a recent medical malpractice case initiated by a Jackson woman who won a $1.3 million award which was deemed excessive by the physician she sued. As we noted, $500,000 of the award was for pain, suffering, scarring and disfigurement, as well as mental/emotional distress, all of which are considered non-economic damages.
A 43-year-old Jackson woman who underwent an abdominoplasty—more commonly known as a “tummy tuck”—was recently awarded $1.3 million by a jury in a medical malpractice case in compensation for serious complications which left her with permanent impairment.