Cases like this explains the need for some expert witness reform:
Dr. Alex Zakharia, 69, of the Miami area, pleaded guilty to contempt of court, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Authorities said he testified as an expert witness in 2002 on behalf of a plaintiff charging a doctor at the VA with medical malpractice in connection with a coronary artery bypass graft.He admitted that during the deposition, he falsely bolstered his credibility as an expert by creating the impression that he was the lead surgeon for numerous coronary artery bypass grafts – when he never conducted such surgeries, officials said.
(via WhiteCoat Rants)
Related posts:
- An "expert" witness fakes his experience
- Expert witness with a conscience
- A physician defends the expert witness system
- Expert witness pleads guilty
- An expert witness goes down in flames
- Fired for being an expert witness
- An expert witness prices himself out of a trial
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 15 comments }
So, Kevin, what would that reform be? It’s always easy to take one anecdote and proclaim a need for “reform”, yet it’s much more difficult to actually propose the specific reform.
I don’t suppose the lawyer will face any discipline for hiring the guy in the first place.
I noticed the Asian dry cleaner closed his business after winning the case where the lawyer wanted fifty-some million dollars for his pants.
CJD, I cant speak for Kevin. But what your reform be? Or do you actually think everything is perfectly ok?
The lawyer should be disbarred. Unless you think he really didn’t know his witness was a fraud.
Of course, he won’t even get a slap on the wrist.
If that “surgeon” were in an operating room instead of a witness stand, messed up a surgery instead of a legal case, with that fraudulent background, the hospital would be at risk for negligent credentialing.
One reform I could think of would be to make legal actions based on your medical credentials the practice of medicine.
The doctor should face the medical board, and if the fraud really is as blatant as described, he should lose his license.
You testify based on your medical credentials……court testimony, peer review testimony, etc., treat it the same as medical practice based on those medical credentials.
The lawyer should be disciplined, fined for what he cost society sued by the people he hurt(assuming he has malpractice insurance, not required in 49 states), preferably prevented from practicing law in the future.
I don’t know of any reform we could do. Is this bad? Absolutely. And it’s being punished, which to me means the system works. I know of no system involving humans where things like this can never happen.
“The lawyer should be disbarred. Unless you think he really didn’t know his witness was a fraud.”
He probably didn’t because the other side didn’t know either. Given the work that an attorney does on the other side’s witnesses, if it were discoverable the defense would likely have figured it out.
“The lawyer should be disciplined, fined for what he cost society”
What did he “cost society”.
A real reform would be to make mandatory “service time” of every doc in a state for licensing. That service time would involve review of malpractice cases from a medical standpoint. It would eliminate “professional witnesses” who testify based on who is paying their bill. To be fair, medical reviewers would have the power to refer cases to appropriate state medical boards when concerns of doctor competence arise.
>>What did he “cost society”.
ROFL!
You think It’s a joke, don’t you?
“the other side” is how this doc’s false testimony came to light.
Google the name, the doc has a sketchy history, to put it mildly.
The lawyer shopped for an opinion, that’s all he cared about. The lawyer didn’t know because he didn’t want to know. Hospitals get sued for negligent credentialing, the lawyer deserves the same.
Not that it will happen of course. Lying and cheating will make him barrister of the year.
One reform that would help is to make legal testimony based on medical credentials the practice of medicine for the purpose of discipline. Medicolegal testimony, whether malpractice claims for either side, or criminal cases, peer review, if the testimony requires medical expertise, then call it the practice of medicine and discipline accordingly. Medical licensure, Board-certification, professional society membership, etc.
“ROFL!
You think It’s a joke, don’t you?”
No, it’s a serious question. One you apparently can’t come up with an answer to. How sad for you.
“A real reform would be to make mandatory “service time” of every doc in a state for licensing.”
You’re joking, right? Can you imagine the outcry?
A physician was brought to trial and had to put his life on hold to defend himself. A patient who may well have been injured, had his ability to get compensation compromised. Who knows, maybe an offer to settle was turned down because the lawyer wanted to take a shot with his fraud of an expert.
Get the jackpot.
The court’s time was wasted. Those people that lawyers like to perform in front of, and try to bamboozle, with “channeling” victims voices and all that. You know, the jury. They got pulled from their lives to sit through this fraud.
You think that’s a joke, you clearly do. How sad for you that you cannot see something so obvious. How sad for society that you still practice law.
re: A real reform would be to make mandatory “service time” of every doc in a state for licensing.”
You’re joking, right? Can you imagine the outcry?
Actually I am not. We already are required to do X amount of CME’s per year (depending on the state). I think you would be surprised just how many doc would be willing to give up time to get rid of the present system of biased, unregulated, whores masquarding as “experts”. Hell you could pay the “service time docs” a fraction of what the whores get, recieve more honest testimony, and cost less in expenses. But we both know that will never happen. Because you and your ilk aren’t interested in the truth. You are interested in getting a W.
You’re interested in protecting your own and putting some more money in your pocket. While you may believe yourselves to be angels, ths public sees through your fraud.
Comments on this entry are closed.