Understanding Different Trial Types
There are two types of malpractice trials available to doctors involved in litigation; by jury or a bench trial exclusively by the judge.
Jury Trial
In a trial by jury, the judge determines the law and the jury determines the facts.
Bench Trial
In a bench trial, the judge wears both the hats of being the trier of law, and the trier of fact. The U.S. Constitution guarantees a trial by jury. If a party does not request a jury trial that right may be deemed forfeit and by the same token, both sides must agree to waive a jury trial.
Which Trial Type is Best?
So, which trial type is best, and why would anyone choose to have a case heard by a judge as opposed to a jury, or vice versa? The reasons are mainly based on preconceived notions about judge and juror biases.
Generally, most litigants favor a jury over a judge because the decision is put into the hands of many rather than in the hands of one. Plaintiff patients usually like juries because lay individuals are believed to be more sympathetic, and a Plaintiff can appeal to the emotions of a jury.
Conversely, Defendant doctors usually prefer bench trials because a judge is thought to be more objective in deciding a case. Requesting a bench trial can also result in a much quicker trial date. Since court dockets in most large cities are becoming increasingly congested, the time difference between a jury trial date and a bench trial date can be literally years.
Assessment
None of the perceptions about the benefits of a jury trial or a bench trial apply to all situations—every case is different. And, there is at least some empirical evidence that some of the commonly held conceptions about bench and jury trials are actually misconceptions.
For example, while it is almost universally believed that juries tend to favor Plaintiffs and award much higher monetary amounts, a recent study by the Department of Justice suggests that judges favor Plaintiffs and return higher verdicts.
Still, jury trials outnumber bench trials by about two to one.
Conclusion
Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.
Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com
OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:
- PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
- PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
- HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
- CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
- ADVISORS: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org
- BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
- FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
- INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors
Filed under: Health Law & Policy | Tagged: Malpractice Liability |

















EHRs and Jury Duty
“My Jury Duty Experience and Computerized Provider Documentation”
[By David Raths]
http://www.healthcare-informatics.com/blogs/david-raths/my-jury-duty-and-computerized-provider-documentation?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+healthcare-informatics+%28Healthcare+Informatics%29
Submitted for your consideration.
Ingrid
LikeLike
Jury Duty and Computerized Provider Documentation
Trial highlights some critical issues for hospitals still using paper-based records, but electronic documentation no panacea.
http://www.healthcare-informatics.com/blogs/david-raths/my-jury-duty-and-computerized-provider-documentation?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+healthcare-informatics+%28Healthcare+Informatics%29
Daniel
LikeLike