Articles Tagged with Orlando medical malpractice lawyer

Published on:

Medical malpractice lawsuits in Florida are an indication to the state’s Department of Health that a doctor may be a potential danger to current and future patients. Regardless of the outcome of the case, the state is required by law to review those cases, identify problem doctors and take appropriate action on their license to practice medicine. Doctors could receive an emergency suspension order, probation, long-term suspension or revocation.medical malpractice lawyer

However, a recent investigation by journalists at The Sun Sentinel revealed that of the 24,000 closed state and federal medical malpractice lawsuits in Florida over the last 10 years, disciplinary charges were filed by the state only 128 times. That breaks down to one-half of 1 percent. A majority of medical malpractice lawsuits in Florida are settled prior to trial, but reporters discovered even those that ended in a jury verdict for the plaintiff rarely resulted in any action from the state board.

What this means is doctors who have been proven to place their patients’ well-being and lives and jeopardy are continuing to practice without sanction, restriction or oversight. Medical malpractice insurance typically covers the monetary damages as determined, and the physician continues on without further action.  Continue reading →

Published on:

In most medical malpractice lawsuits, plaintiffs have to prove “but-for” causation. What this means is but for the negligence of the medical professional, plaintiff would not have suffered an adverse outcome. doctor

However, this burden of proof would leave those who already had terminal conditions or residual chances of survival or existing serious illnesses with little or no chance of recourse for their doctor’s medical negligence. Enter the “loss of chance” doctrine. It’s generally used in medical malpractice lawsuits involving a plaintiff who can’t prove “but for” causation because he or she was likely to die from the condition even before the doctor was negligent. In these cases, the doctor’s negligence usually involves the failure to diagnose or treat, which causes plaintiff a loss of chance to survive or have a more optimal outcome.

In a recent case before the Washington Supreme Court, justices were asked to review two questions in a “loss-of-chance” medical malpractice lawsuit:

  • Should the court use a “but for” or “substantial factor” standard of causation in these types of claims;
  • Should evidence relating to contributory negligence be excluded based on plaintiff’s failure to follow a physician’s orders.

Continue reading →

Published on:

There is a lot of anxiety that comes along with being a new parent. One of those sources of anxiety shouldn’t be the doctors and nurses trusted to take care of your baby.pregnant

Unfortunately, severe birth injuries and infant deaths caused by medical malpractice are more common than some people think. The Florida Department of Health Bureau of Vital Statistics reports that between 7 and 8 of every 1,000 births in Florida results in fetal death. In the U.S., 27 out of every 1,000 births results in a birth injury. That means three babies born every hour suffer a birth injury, which amounts to 2,000 a month nationally.

Recently, the parents of one of those children have filed a lawsuit against a hospital, a doctor, two medical service providers and a nurse – all of whom they allege are liable for injuries to their newborn son, who was delivered 10 weeks early in 2015. This was the couple’s third child, and the mother developed a medical condition that resulted in her being forced to have the baby boy delivered by emergency Cesarean. Being premature, the boy suffered from digestive issues. According to WYFF NBC-4, the baby was transferred to a hospital in Greenville. Doctors recommended he be transferred to another location in Charlotte, but the family wanted him to be treated in Greenville because it would allow them be closer to their other two children until the boy was strong enough to go home. Continue reading →

Published on:

Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeal has joined the 4th DCA in its finding that damage caps in medical malpractice injury lawsuits are unconstitutional. These damage caps, enacted by a 2003 overhaul of state law by then-Gov. Jeb Bush, limit the amount of money injury plaintiffs can receive for pain and suffering when medical malpractice results in a serious personal injury. doctor

The Florida Supreme Court is still reviewing the 4th DCA’s finding in a similar case, North Broward Hospital District v. Kalitan, in which the hospital is appealing the court’s finding that damage caps shouldn’t apply to injury lawsuits stemming from the breach of care acceptable care standards by doctors, nurses and other health care workers.

This conflict between the appeals court rulings and the law come after the Florida Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in McCall v. U.S., in which justices ruled non-economic damages in medical malpractice wrongful death lawsuits are not constitutional. So the sticking point in the current cases is whether that also extends to injury cases, where plaintiff did not die. Continue reading →

Published on:

Plaintiff in the medical malpractice case of Tillson v. Lane will have the opportunity to take his case to trial, following the Vermont Supreme Court’s reversal of an earlier trial court ruling that granted summary judgment to defendant on the “Loss of Chance” doctrine.eye

The “Loss of Chance” doctrine, while permitted in several jurisdictions, is not recognized in Florida, and neither is it recognized in Vermont, where this case originated. Under the “loss of chance” doctrine, plaintiffs are compensated for the extent to which a defendant’s negligence reduced victim’s likelihood of achieving a better outcome, assuming that likelihood was reduced by less than 51 percent.

The idea is that rather than treating a medical malpractice case as an all-or-nothing issue, claimants should be able to pursue action against health care providers whose actions or inaction resulted in loss of chance of a better outcome or of avoiding adverse consequences. But again, Florida has expressly rejected this doctrine, and so has Vermont, by essentially finding that health care providers should only be accountable for the damages proximately caused by negligent acts or omissions. So it was in this context that the Tillson case arose. Continue reading →

Contact Information