What Are The Challenges To Winning A Medical Malpractice Lawsuit?

A lawsuit that was launched in response to an incident of medical malpractice could prove hard to win. In many instances, the jury’s verdict tends to favor those that represent the defense.

Not all medical malpractice cases get decided in a courtroom.

Experienced Personal Injury Lawyer in Richmond Hill understand how to work towards a settlement. Realize that the 2 sides could settle at any point, even during the course of a trial. If a case were to make its way to a courtroom, then the plaintiff-lawyer team should expect some specific challenges.

Juries do not know what should be expected from every physician.

A doctor with a given specialty might be expected to live up to a certain list of standards. A medical expert in a specific area of specialization would need to offer some evidence, in order to prove a given doctor’s poor performance.

Some expectations could involve situations that do not arise with great frequency, or not on a daily basis. For instance, following the birth of an infant, the medical staff should obtain an Apgar score. Not all members of a jury would be expected to have some familiarity with that score.

Hence, the attorney for the plaintiff would need to hire an expert. That expert could explain the significance of an Apgar score, and what it might say about an infant’s health.

Juries often find it hard to cast doubt on any doctor.

Instead, members of a jury tend to trust the good intentions of a doctor’s actions, or a doctor’s judgment. That bias makes it hard for them to offer a verdict that does not favor the defense/doctor.

Still, if a different doctor were to question the actions or judgment of the physician at the defense table, then the jury might be able to overcome its bias. Personal injury lawyers have hopes that just such a thing might happen, when an expert has been called to the witness stand.

Keep in mind, though, the fact that an attorney for the defense could also introduce a different expert. That expert’s testimony might contradict that one that came from the mouth of the witness for the plaintiff. In such a situation, the members of the jury must decide which of the 2 to believe.

Sometimes one expert might have an explanation that is easier to understand. If that were the case, then the jury might favor the explanation that it was most able to understand. That is why personal injury lawyers must be extra careful selecting the medical expert that must sit in the witness stand.

A jury’s verdict reflects more than the strength of one side’s argument. It also shows how understandable that same argument appeared in the jurors’ eyes.

More to explorer