Hey, I heard about a doctor who was high when he was operating and left a woman paralyzed because he was so strung out.

Does that make us even?

Non-economic damages, ie. pain and suffering damages, in excess of $250,000 will almost certainly be long term debilitating injuries. Juries don’t award noneconomic damages (which are different from punitives, by the way) on cases where you’re healed and fine 6 weeks later. Google any large med mal award with high noneconomics and you’ll find a very painful injury 99% of the time.

On this issue though, here’s a question for you. Considering that any case where the proposed cap would kick in likely involves millions in past and future medical bills, as well as lost wages, and probably long term care, how will capping noneconomics save you, the consumer, a dollar? If it doesn’t, what have you gained?

“You lawyers have no expertise in medicine, yet you have no problem litigating it and trying to sound like experts about medicine in front of Juries every day.”

Utterly false. In fact, the law acknowledges we don’t know anything about medicine, and requires expert testimony. Lawyers may make arguments based upon that testimony, but they cannot present facts on the issues.

And many lawyers do have a problem litigating it. The number of med mal plaintiff’s lawyers and defense lawyers is rather limited due to the complexity of those cases.

“And don’t even think of bringing up the $500/hr. “hired gun” retired pathologist you bring in as an “expert witness” in a Neurosurgery case. “

I will bring it up. It’s a requirement that physicians initially insisted on and so we have no choice. The defense has experts as well – do you think they work for free? I’m unfamiliar with the case you’re referring to re: the pathologist – do you have a cite? Or are you repeating stories of cases you’re not really familiar with?

Where’s your proof that “those most seriously injured by medical malpractice” are at all helped by the current lottery system, or would be in any way hurt by health courts. You accuse others are fact-less comments, but you provide no evidence for your comebacks.

Where do you get off saying that physicians have no expertise in medical malpractice litigation. You lawyers have no expertise in medicine, yet you have no problem litigating it and trying to sound like experts about medicine in front of Juries every day. If we’re not legal experts, there’s no way in Hell you are medical experts. And don’t even think of bringing up the $500/hr. “hired gun” retired pathologist you bring in as an “expert witness” in a Neurosurgery case.

That’s quite a statement indicting hundreds of thousands of plaintiffs and their attorneys across the country who are litigating everything from fraud in the formation of contracts to legal malpractice and who receive justice daily in our courts. From a guy whose contact with the system consists of what, maybe a couple of trials? And reading some physician blogs and talking to other docs about cases he knows little about?

Yes, clearly the good doctor deserves protection for his delicate beliefs.

Considering the effect his uninformed beliefs, were they to become law, would have on those most seriously injured by medical malpractice, perhaps he should be attacked though.