LEGAL: Expert Witness Defined

By Staff Reporters

***

***

What exactly is an Expert Witness?

At D.E. Marcinko & Associates an “expert witness” possesses specialized knowledge in a particular field and is qualified to provide deposition or testimony in court and under oath. This testimony can be based on their personal experience, education, training and/or research. The role of an expert witness is to provide objective and unbiased opinions, analysis, and insights to help a lawyer, judge and/or jury understand technical or complex issues related to the case.

EDUCATION: Books

An expert witness can be called by either the prosecution or the defense in a legal case. The expert witness may be required to provide a written report or affidavit detailing their opinions, analyses and conclusions, and they may be asked to testify in court to provide oral testimony and answer questions from the judge and lawyers.

MORE: https://marcinkoassociates.com/expert-witness/

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Read, Refer, Like and Subscribe

***

***

EXPERT WITNESSES: What Exactly Are They?

SPONSOR: http://www.MARCINKOASSOCIATES.com

***

***

At DE Marcinko & Associates an “expert witness” possesses specialized knowledge in a particular field and is qualified to provide deposition or testimony in court and under oath. This testimony can be based on their personal experience, education, training or research. The role of an expert witness is to provide objective and unbiased opinions, analysis, and insights to help a lawyer, judge and/or jury understand technical or complex issues related to the case.

An expert witness can be called by either the prosecution or the defense in a legal case. The expert witness may be required to provide a written report or affidavit detailing their opinions, analyses and conclusions, and they may be asked to testify in court to provide oral testimony and answer questions from the judge and lawyers.

READ HERE: https://marcinkoassociates.com/expert-witness/

MORE: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2023/09/02/the-medical-expert-trial-witness/

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***

ADVICE: Financial, Investment or Medical Practice Management Second Fiduciary Opinions

***

MARCINKO & ASSOCIATES, Inc.

SPONSOR: http://www.MARCINKOASSOCIATES.com

Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP®

Certified Medical Planner®

SPONSOR: http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

CMP logo

***

FINANCIAL PLANNING

CAREER DEVELOPMENT

MEDICAL PRACTICE BUY IN / OUT

INVESTMENT ANALYSIS

PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT

MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS

PRACTICE APPRAISALS AND VALUATIONS

RETIREMENT PLANNING

FEE-ONLY

***

CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA

EMAIL: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

***

The Medical Expert [Trial Witness]

An Important Determinant of Success or Failure

By Dr. Jay S. Grife; JD, MA 

In every civil medical malpractice trial, besides counsel for the respective parties, there is a Plaintiff (patient) and a Defendant (doctor).

In addition to the parties and their respective counsel, witnesses, both lay and expert, form the main body of testimony that will be elicited and heard by the Judge and jury.  

Overview of Witness Types 

Both lay and expert witnesses serve to tell the story of the parties to the court.  In a medical malpractice case, a lay witness generally explains the facts of specific events which they have witnessed, or more likely, how the Plaintiff has been affected by the alleged negligence. The parties may also call a special kind of witness, called a “medical expert”, to testify on their behalf.   

Definition of Medical Expert 

An expert witness is simply a witness with experience in a particular field, whose testimony will aide the lay jury in understanding the medical aspects of the case. In most medical malpractice cases, the Plaintiff must present expert testimony from a health care practitioner that the Defendant fell below the standard of care required and caused injury to the patient.  

These are the two essential prongs which when conjoined equate to negligence in legal terminology; (1) liability being a breach in the standard of care and (2) causation being that the negligence caused the Plaintiff damages. 

The “Two-Pronged” Test 

It is essential to understand that a Plaintiff cannot prevail in litigation if only one of these two prongs has been left unsatisfied.

For example, if a physician failed to diagnose cancer in a terminally ill patient, the fact that the diagnosis was not made can be deemed negligent, but the negligence in the failure to diagnose did not damage the patient, in that she was terminal when she initially presented. 

It is this two pronged test which delineates legal negligence from commonly expressed negligence or a bad result from the care and treatment provided.

Experts Not Always Required 

In rare instances, and in ever diminishing jurisdictions, expert testimony is not required in medical negligence matters.

In those instances, the legal doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur or “the thing speaks for itself” often will attach to obviate the expert’s place.

Normally, in a medical malpractice case, a Plaintiff is required to establish: (1) a breach in the standard of care or that an act or omission by the Defendant that was not in keeping with the degree of skill and learning ordinarily used under the same or similar circumstances by members of defendant’s profession; and (2) causation or that such negligence or omission caused the plaintiff’s injury.

The Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine 

However, the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur exists to preclude the need for direct proof of negligence through medical testimony, and allows cases submitted under the doctrine to proceed to the jury even in the absence of testimony as to negligence because a jury is permitted to draw an inference of negligence from the specific act itself.

The classic example of such an incident would be the leaving of a surgical instrument inside a patient’s body, or operating upon the wrong body part [“Never-Event”]. 

Never-Events: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2007/12/20/new-never-events-policy/

Conclusion:

What has been your experience with medical expert witnesses – help or hindrance – hired gun or balanced interpreter?

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Medical Negligence and the “Burden of Proof”

Understanding the Malpractice Trial Process

By Dr. Jay S. Grife; Esq, MAinsurance-book

In all civil trials, the plaintiff, as the accuser, has the burden of proving his case.  Much like a criminal defendant, a civil defendant has no burden and is presumed “innocent” of any claim by the plaintiff.  As a result, if the plaintiff presents no evidence, or insufficient evidence to support his claim, the defendant wins without having to present his case.  The burden the plaintiff carries is that he must prove his case by what is called a preponderance of the evidence.  In other words, the plaintiff must prove it is more likely than not that he should win.  The best way to visualize this burden is to imagine a set of scales.  If the scales are even, or tipped in favor of the defendant, then the plaintiff has not carried his burden, and loses.  In order to prevail, the plaintiff must tip the scales in his favor.

Proving Medical Malpractice

To prove a case of medical malpractice, a plaintiff-patient must present evidence that the defendant-doctor was negligent, and the plaintiff does this by proving the treatment provided was below the applicable standard of care.  The “standard of care” is the care and skill that a reasonably prudent practitioner would provide in treating a patient.  It is established by the medical community at large, and is constantly evolving.  Care that violates the standard of care today may not necessarily violate the standard of care several years ago.  This distinction is an important one, since most cases take several years to get to trial.  The standard of care is never based on the outcome of the case; a bad result does not necessarily mean a violation of the standard of care.

The Medical Expert Witnesses

Expert medical testimony is required to establish a violation of the standard of care in virtually all medical malpractice cases.  A plaintiff who fails to present the required expert medical testimony in a medical malpractice case will lose.  The plaintiff must also produce expert medical testimony that the alleged negligence caused the injury.

For example, suppose that a patient’s widow brings a medical malpractice case against a surgeon who admitted the patient for removal of an AO plate embedded in bone.  The plaintiff-widow alleges that the surgeon should have done something to prevent a pulmonary embolism, which occurred three days after the patient was dismissed from the hospital, killing him.  The patient might have an expert who would testify that she would not have removed the AO plate, but left it in place.  Such testimony does not carry the burden of proving care below the standard required of the surgeon.  Indeed, in most cases, the standard of care allows a practitioner to choose from a variety of treatment options within an acceptable range.  Mere testimony by an expert witness that “I would have treated this patient differently” is insufficient to establish a breach of the standard of care.  The bad result also is not itself proof of any negligence.  Nor is there any evidence that the doctor caused the patient’s death (i.e., that the embolism would not have occurred without the alleged negligence of the surgeon). Therefore, doctor wins on all elements.

Assessment

Have you ever been involved in a medical malpractice trial; or other healthcare litigation process? The Medical Executive-Post readers are interested in hearing your story.

Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this Medical Executive-Post are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, be sure to subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com  or Bio: www.stpub.com/pubs/authors/MARCINKO.htm

Get our Widget: Get this widget!

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/prod.aspx?prod_id=23759

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Health Administration Terms: www.HealthDictionarySeries.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed

And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed.

Link: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

Product Details  Product Details

Expert Witness Risks

A New Emerging Modern Peril

By Dr. David Edward Marcinko; MBA, CMP™

[Publisher-in-Chief]

insurance-bookIn the past, a physician expert witness for the plaintiff was merely an opposing opinion by a learned and/or like colleague. Today, it is becoming a risk management minefield as the AMA and other groups are urging state medical licensing boards to police expert witnesses, which might require expert testimony be considered the practice of medicine.

The AANS

This seems especially true with the Rolling Meadows Illinois based American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS).

Feuding Members

Currently, a member of the AANS can file a complaint against any fellow member for testimony as either an expert witness for the plaintiff, or defense witness for the doctor. A committee of four then reviews the court records and requires the accuser to face the accused in a formal review. Sanctions range form three months to a year, to complete expulsion from the association. In the past twenty years, the program has reviewed 27 cases all involving plaintiff testimony. One led to expulsion and ten to suspension.

Assessment

Since 2001, the courts are beginning to take the AANS process seriously. After years of operations without strong legal backing, the program was upheld by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, in Chicago by a neurosurgeon whom the group suspended in 1997. So always remember, if you testify falsely, or too far from the norm, you may be at risk.

Conclusion

And so your thoughts, opinions and comments are appreciated?

Speaker: If you need a moderator or a speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David Edward Marcinko; MBA – Editor and Publisher-in-Chief – is available for speaking engagements. Contact him at: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

Product Details  Product Details