A single juror brings down a malpractice award

December 21, 2006

And the plaintiff lawyer isn’t happy:

“A majority of the jurors saw this as a $5- to $7-million case, and I very much agreed with them,” Faison said. “But there was one juror who was out of step and out of touch.”



Related posts:

  1. A juror faints, the defendants rush to help: A mistrial in the Charlie Weis case
  2. One Angry Man: How an individual educates his co-jurors in a medical malpractice case
  3. A juror talks about his experience on a malpractice trial
  4. Using the layman juror to the plaintiff lawyer’s advantage
  5. "You were involved in a malpractice suit last year, weren’t you?"
  6. A surgical resident on the hook for a $23 million malpractice award
  7. Malpractice plaintiff wins case, wants more


KevinMD.com on Facebook


  Follow on Twitter   Subscribe



{ 6 comments }

1 Gasman December 21, 2006 at 11:03 am

Lawyers usually love the jury system when it works their way; that they play on the jurors emotions is no secret.
One juror cannot be blamed for the decision of the whole. A consensus was reached that (depending on the state) most or all signed onto.
Perhaps the lawyer was merely ineffective in being sufficiently pursuasive for all of the jurors. Since the legal profession has all but stated that poor outcome is the res ipsa of malpractice, then perhaps this ‘poor outcome’ (by the lawyers own admission) is res ipsa of legal malpractice.

2 Anonymous December 21, 2006 at 4:03 pm

I think it’s funny when people who have never tried a case pontificate on how jurors emotions are “played on”.

When did the “legal profession” even come close to stating that poor outcomes are the res ipsa of malpractice? Or is this another one of those opinions you’ve come up with that you’ve decided are fact?

3 Samson Isberg December 22, 2006 at 1:29 am

I have reviewed 126 cases involving alleged medical malpractice and have testified in four different trials. Yes, the legal profession do believe that poor outcomes are the res ipsa of malpractice. Merry christmas.

4 Anonymous December 22, 2006 at 8:50 am

You live in Norway. You have not reviewed a single US case, and based on your posts, have no idea what US lawyers think. The “trials” you are referring to have little in common with US ones.

5 Samson Isberg December 22, 2006 at 3:13 pm

Merry Christmas all the same. But don’t expect any presents – Santa’s watching this blog

6 Anonymous December 22, 2006 at 3:35 pm

Santa loves those who help those in need pay their bills – including their physicians’ bills. Don’t worry about me.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post: A patient dies after bleeding from her dialysis site

Next post: It’s executive physicals or quit

Site Meter