Again, why? Because you say so? If they had simply sat there and the defendant moved for a mistrial, would you allow costs for the plaintiff?

Because costs were incurred and the defendant has nothing to gain in court. The burden of costs incurred must be borne by the plaintiff.

Trust me that if a mistrail was requested and granted to the defendant, the plaintiff’s attorney would would expect payment for services rendered if an hourly rate was paid instead of a contigency.

In this case the defense attorney will expect the hourly rate, and the opportunity cost to the physicians cannot be ignored.

One of my proposals for legal reform is to have the jury at a location outside the courtroom with testimony presented in a delayed fashion via loudspeaker. This would permit any contested or objectional information from ever being heard by the jury and would have prevented the mistrails in the circumstances mentioned. It would also level the playing field to great extent and diminish the theatrics that too often obscure or diminish the facts.

If a witness had inadvertently discussed insurance and the physicians moved for a mistrial, would you want the plaintiff’s costs reimbursed, as well as the attorney’s hourly rate for the time spent in trial to that point?

If the physician/defendants had opted to sit on their hands don’t you think that would have influenced the jury? Would the judge have declared a mistrial in that instance also?