I would absolutely consider ending a lawsuit with a negotiation instead of a negative judgment to be a win. Obviously the jury pool would have been biased in favor of the doctor, but they could have requested a new jury.
That’s was up to the plaintiff, not the judge. As it was a civil suit it was probably too expensive them to pay to panel another jury and then re-argue the case. Lawyers are expensive.
Correct, but I’m evaluating this from the defendant’s perspective. If you want to consider this a neutral development until you’re able to evaluate the facts of the case, that’s your prerogative. If you find them, I’d be interested in reading them.
From what I could read, he just used a defib kit. Would his ability to ease symptoms of a heart attack have any bearing on his fitness to do whatever the hell gynelogical oncology entails?
I guess it doesn’t have to, in fact. It just has to feel like it does to win over a selection of people who don’t really care amd wouldn’t know better.
You can sue to include layers/court fees. And most of the time, these types of layers dont do it for base fees, they do it for a % of the settlement. If theyre going after malpractice, they have insurance to pay that out. I cant really imagine the cost of court would sway them against going back to trial.
They likely made a settlement offer the first time too. The easily could have made a worse settlement offer the second time because court was going so well, and the plantif knew they might not get what they were asking for.
I would absolutely consider ending a lawsuit with a negotiation instead of a negative judgment to be a win. Obviously the jury pool would have been biased in favor of the doctor, but they could have requested a new jury.
That’s was up to the plaintiff, not the judge. As it was a civil suit it was probably too expensive them to pay to panel another jury and then re-argue the case. Lawyers are expensive.
Yes, and their position was worsened by him being a good doctor. That feels like a win to me.
Not to the plaintiff if he was actually guilty of medical malpractice.
Saving someone’s life doesn’t mean you can’t commit malpractice.
But none of us knows anything about the details or merits of that case, so…
Correct, but I’m evaluating this from the defendant’s perspective. If you want to consider this a neutral development until you’re able to evaluate the facts of the case, that’s your prerogative. If you find them, I’d be interested in reading them.
From what I could read, he just used a defib kit. Would his ability to ease symptoms of a heart attack have any bearing on his fitness to do whatever the hell gynelogical oncology entails?
I guess it doesn’t have to, in fact. It just has to feel like it does to win over a selection of people who don’t really care amd wouldn’t know better.
Isn’t gynelogical oncology just like, cancers relating to women’s health? So uterine cancer or the like.
That sounds reasonably likely.
You’re assuming it wasn’t his insurance company that pushed to settle to avoid the costs of another trial.
I’ve worked in insurance companies for long term bodily injury claims, they wanted that from the start. The mistrial allowed them to get it.
You can sue to include layers/court fees. And most of the time, these types of layers dont do it for base fees, they do it for a % of the settlement. If theyre going after malpractice, they have insurance to pay that out. I cant really imagine the cost of court would sway them against going back to trial.
It’s a malpractice suit so the insurance company was making the calls.
Insurance is on the side of the defendant. The plantif determines if they go back to court. Insuance has nothing to do with that
It does if they make a settlement offer to keep it out of court a second time.
They likely made a settlement offer the first time too. The easily could have made a worse settlement offer the second time because court was going so well, and the plantif knew they might not get what they were asking for.
We dont know