Liability insurance eventually took its seat as a crucial player in medical malpractice suits. The Massachusetts Medical Insurance Society, founded in 1908, was among the first to provide and make mention of insurance against “unjust suits for alleged malpractice” in 1919. On one hand, the nascent brand of insurance offered physicians peace of mind; settlements and damages would be covered. On the other hand, it served to assure plaintiffs that every meritorious claim should be brought forward, as that claim would almost certainly see payment.
In United States law, the federal government as well as state and tribal governments generally enjoy sovereign immunity, also known as governmental immunity, from lawsuits.[1] Local governments in most jurisdictions enjoy immunity from some forms of suit, particularly in tort. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act provides foreign governments, including state-owned companies, with a related form of immunity—state immunity—that shields them from lawsuits except in relation to certain actions relating to commercial activity in the United States. The principle of sovereign immunity in US law was inherited from the English common law legal maxim rex non potest peccare, meaning "the king can do no wrong."[2] In some situations, sovereign immunity may be waived by law.
A study by Michelle M. Mello and others published in the journal Health Affairs in 2010 estimated that the total annual cost of the medical liability system, including "defensive medicine," was about 2.4 percent of total U.S. health care spending.[53] The authors noted that "this is less than some imaginative estimates put forward in the health reform debate, and it represents a small fraction of total health care spending," although it was not "trivial" in absolute terms.[53]
This Health Policy Report describes the malpractice system in the United States, examines its shortcomings, and analyzes the forces that have led to past and current malpractice crises. The authors review options for reform of the U.S. malpractice system. Conventional tort reforms include caps on damages, limits on attorneys' fees, and shortening of the statute of limitations. Experts have also proposed major system reforms, such as enterprise liability or administrative compensation.

we have understood the Eleventh Amendment to stand not so much for what it says, but for the presupposition of our constitutional structure which it confirms: that the States entered the federal system with their sovereignty intact; that the judicial authority in Article III is limited by this sovereignty, and that a State will therefore not be subject to suit in federal court unless it has consented to suit, either expressly or in the "plan of the convention." States may consent to suit, and therefore waive their Eleventh Amendment immunity by removing a case from state court to federal court. See Lapides v. Board of Regents of University System of Georgia.
Somewhere between 210,000 and 400,000 Americans die each year due to a medical error (James 2013); it is now the third leading cause of death in the United States (Makary 2016). Many more sustain injuries that leave them with lifelong disabilities. Moreover, a recent national survey revealed that 21% of Americans have personally experienced a medical error, and 31% have been involved in the care of a family member or friend who did. As discussed above, tort reform measures may be effective in limiting the number and success of malpractice lawsuits, but don’t necessarily address the underlying issue of the malpractice epidemic in America.

If you want to exchange the product you ordered for a different one, you must request this exchange and complete your replacement order within 60 days of purchase. The purchase price of the original item, less any money paid to government entities, such as filing fees or taxes, or to other third parties with a role in processing your order, will be credited to your LegalZoom account. Any payments made directly by you to attorneys affiliated with our legal plans or attorney-assisted products are not eligible for exchange or credit. Any price difference between the original order and the replacement order or, if a replacement order is not completed within 60 days of purchase, the full original purchase price (in each case less any money paid to government entities or other third parties) will be credited to the original form of payment. If you paid for your original order by check, LegalZoom will mail a check for the applicable amount to your billing address.


Back in 1984, the extrapolated statistics from relatively few records in only several states of the United States estimated that between 44,000-98,000 people annually die in hospitals because of medical errors.[3] Much work has been done since then, including work by the author of that study who moved on from those low estimates back in the 1990s. For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention currently says that 75,000 patients die annually, in hospitals alone, from infections alone - just one cause of harm in just one kind of care setting.[4] From all causes there have been numerous other studies, including "A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated with Hospital Care" by John T. James, PhD[5] that estimates 400,000 unnecessary deaths annually in hospitals alone. Using these numbers, medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death in the United States, only behind heart disease and cancer. Less than one quarter of care takes place in hospitals. Across all care settings the numbers are higher.
There’s no way to tell how often doctors to lie to protect their colleagues, but ProPublica has found that patients are frequently not told the truth when they are harmed. Studies also show that many physicians do not have a favorable view of informing patients about mistakes and that health care workers are afraid to speak up if things don’t seem right. Many doctors and nurses have told ProPublica that they fear retaliation if they speak out about patient safety problems.
If the doctor's mistake was one that a reasonable doctor would make, he has not acted negligently and has not committed medical malpractice. Often when a doctor fails to diagnose a medical problem, he may mistake the problem for something else and attempt to treat that. Likewise, if the medical problem is extremely rare, unknown, or difficult to identify, than a proper diagnose may not be possible.
Ex.: New York has a two-and-a-half year statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases, set by New York Civil Practice Law and Rules section 214-a. Let’s say a surgeon in New York negligently leaves a foreign object in a patient during surgery. What if the patient discovers the object 3 years after the surgery? In this example, the patient still has time to sue because New York has adopted a 1 year discovery rule. This patient actually has 1 year after discovery of the object to file a lawsuit. (Note, however, that if there is proven evidence that the plaintiff missed the statute of limitations because the object should have been discovered earlier than it was, then the case could be dismissed.)
Just because your doctor or any other medical professional made a mistake about your care, it does not amount to medical malpractice. As a plaintiff (the person who brings the claim) you need to establish a few things before you can even file a medical malpractice lawsuit. If you are unsure whether or not you have grounds to make a claim, consider this:
*AV Preeminent and BV Distinguished are registered certification marks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell is the facilitator of a peer review rating process. Ratings reflect the confidential opinions of members of the Bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell ratings fall into two categories ─ legal ability and general ethical standards.
Medical malpractice lawsuits, like all civil cases, can only be brought within a certain period of time. That deadline is set by a law known called a “statute of limitations.” Every state has passed these kinds of laws, with different deadlines according to the kind of case you want to file. In almost every state, there is a dedicated statute of limitations that applies to medical malpractice cases.
The Seattle medical malpractice lawyers at The Tinker Law Firm, PLLC can help if you have reason to believe that you or a loved one was harmed by a negligent breakdown in the communication of medical test results. Our attorneys have recovered millions of dollars on behalf of those injured by negligent medical care. For a free review of your case, complete our online contact form.
There are any number of scenarios under which a physician can be negligent. Keep in mind that in the examples above -- and in every other case -- it is incumbent upon you to prove that your physician breached his duty to practice according to the standard of care, and that breach caused you harm. See What You Need to Prove to learn about the key legal pieces you and your attorney would need to put together.
In an action against a surgeon for malpractice, the jury should be instructed that the plaintiff must show by a preponderance of the evidence and the jury must find that the defendant in the performance of his service either did some particular thing or things that physicians and surgeons of ordinary skill, care and diligence would not have done under the same or similar circumstances, or that the defendant failed or omitted to do some particular thing or things which physicians and surgeons of ordinary skill, care and diligence would have done under the same or similar circumstances.
Errors in treatment go hand-in-hand with diagnostic errors. If your physician negligently misdiagnoses your condition, it is likely that the treatment prescribed will also be improper. For example, if you were misdiagnosed with cancer, any prescribed chemo or radiation therapy could have a detrimental effect on your health. This error in treatment -- which is dependent upon your physician’s negligent diagnosis -- also constitutes medical negligence and malpractice.
In the course of medical treatment, mistakes can be made that can further damage your health — or lead to new issues altogether. When these situations are caused by the medical negligence of health care providers, it is important that they are held accountable — not just so that those affected can be compensated, but so that the negligence is not repeated.
As for the marital stress, how did it get to court? Let's say the couple asks the psychiatrist if she's been divorced. I say she must either say yes, or say I won't tell you. Her choice. It would not be OK for her to lie. At that point the couple can find someone else. No damages. No court. When you say "must be disclosed," do you mean the court would hold that the psychiatrist should volunteer the information? First you would need an expert to testify to that. Then there would have to be damages, and proximate cause. Seems like a real stretch.
After experiencing negligent medical care from a trusted physician or hospital, it can be difficult choosing an attorney from a sea of unknown names. The law firm you choose may be the most important decision you ever make about your case.  Ask each attorney you are considering how many medical malpractice cases they have actually tried. Then ask yourself, for the same fee, wouldn’t you rather have the experience and expertise of The O’Keefe Firm to represent you?

This is often the most difficult part of medical negligence cases and even lawyers have trouble getting their heads around it sometimes.  You may be able to prove that a doctor did the wrong thing, but you also have to prove that what happened next was the result of that wrong thing and you have to prove that it would not have happened if the wrong thing had not been done.  Deciding whether or not this is the case involves both factual and legal issues and is sometimes very hard to do.  You really need a lawyer who is highly experienced in medical negligence cases to look at this for you.


In the course of medical treatment, mistakes can be made that can further damage your health — or lead to new issues altogether. When these situations are caused by the medical negligence of health care providers, it is important that they are held accountable — not just so that those affected can be compensated, but so that the negligence is not repeated.
No. You do not need to obtain your medical records before speaking with an attorney. However, if you have copies of your record, it will allow the evaluation of your case to proceed more quickly. Many times your case will be reviewed by a physician or nurse in order to determine if medical malpractice has occurred. This requires a thorough evaluation of your medical records. If you do not bring your medical records to your appointment with your attorney, you will be asked to sign a medical waiver, releasing your medical records to our office so that a proper investigation may be carried out.

This list is not exhaustive. Nor is every item on the list a malpractice lawsuit per se. Recall the four elements above. For a psychiatrist to be liable for malpractice, he or she must have failed to take reasonable care, and the patient must have suffered injury as a result. A doctor can take reasonable care and still make an incorrect judgment call, so not every incorrect decision is actionable as malpractice. However, some items on the list—for example, engaging in a sexual relationship with a patient—almost always lead to prevailing malpractice claims.


Suing the Government under the FTCA is different than suing a private company or individual.  There are a number of hoops that you have to jump through before you can even file the lawsuit. There are also certain limitations in lawsuits against the Government that you don’t have in lawsuits against private parties.  While you are entitled to a trial under the FTCA, it is a “bench trial,” meaning the judge renders the decision and not a jury.  Fortunately for the victims in the above-referenced malpractice case, the judge recognized the serious and permanent nature of the child’s injuries and the extraordinary expenses that would be required to provide for the child’s future medical and life care needs.
A patient who did not have his or her wounds dressed or treated properly and later develops an infection may decide to sue. If an anesthesiologist or other employee gives the patient a drug that he or she should have known would cause issues, the patient may pursue a medical malpractice claim. A common cause for a medical malpractice claim is when the patient was misdiagnosed or had a delayed diagnosis due to a mistake.
Medical malpractice law in the U.S. has generally been left up to the state rather than the federal government. Certain aspects of malpractice regulations can vary widely from state to state. Many states have also adopted recent changes that are referred to as “tort reform” measures. Some of these changes have been taken in response to the criticism that medical malpractice suits lead to “defensive medicine” –  in other words, medical professionals are so concerned about avoiding malpractice suits that they behave in unproductive or even harmful ways.
Over the years, physicians and health care providers argued that malpractice claims were also driving up the cost of health care. They contended that jury verdicts in the millions of dollars had to be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher insurance premiums and physician fees. In addition, many physicians were forced to practice "defensive medicine" to guard against malpractice claims. Defensive medicine refers to the conducting of additional tests and procedures that are not medically necessary but that would assist in defeating a negligence claim.
Click on the name of the lawyer answering your question to see their profile, and then you can click the view website tab to find out detailed information on your personal injury topic. The information provided on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Finally, as part of the discovery process, an injured plaintiff may be required to undergo an independent medical examination to confirm the physical injuries alleged. The law allows the defendant to identify a qualified medical expert and force the injured party to undergo a noninvasive examination. Should this occur, we will again prepare you for the examination.

Critics who contest tort-reform laws argue that medical malpractice awards account for only one percent of the total yearly National Health Care expenditures. They also claim that such reforms protect insurance companies and physicians, and not the patients. Trial attorneys point the finger at the insurance companies. They claim that insurers keep prices artificially low while competing for market share and new revenue. When the economy is sluggish and the market is slow, they increase premiums because they are no longer able to use Stock Market gains to subsidize low rates. Proponents of reform continue to maintain, however, that a federal cap will ultimately result in lower medical costs and greater medical access for the general population.
The Court has found that somewhat different rules may apply to Congressional efforts to subject the states to suit in the domain of federal bankruptcy law. In Central Virginia Community College v. Katz, the Court held that state sovereign immunity was not implicated by the exercise of in rem jurisdiction by bankruptcy courts in voiding a preferential transfer to a state. Justice Stevens, writing for a majority of five (including Justice O'Connor, in one of her last cases before retirement, and Justices Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer), referred to the rationale of an earlier bankruptcy decision, but relied more broadly on the nature of the bankruptcy power vested in Congress under Article I. "The question", he stated, "[was] not whether Congress could 'abrogate' state sovereign immunity in the Bankruptcy Act (as Congress had attempted to do); rather, because the history and justification of the Bankruptcy Clause, as well as legislation enacted immediately following ratification, demonstrate that [the Bankruptcy Clause] was intended not just as a grant of legislative authority to Congress, but also to authorize limited subordination of state sovereign immunity in the bankruptcy arena." In reaching this conclusion, he acknowledged that the Court's decision in Seminole Tribe and succeeding cases had assumed that those holdings would apply to the Bankruptcy Clause, but stated that the Court was convinced by "[c]areful study and reflection" that "that assumption was erroneous". The Court then crystallized the current rule: when Congressional legislation regulates matters that implicate "a core aspect of the administration of bankrupt estates", sovereign immunity is no longer available to the States if the statute subjects them to private suits.

In order to prove medical negligence, one must show that their doctor deviated from the accepted level of medical care that could have been reasonably expected from a physician. Deviations that may support a medical malpractice claim include: surgical errors; medication errors; infections from hospitals; delayed diagnosis of cancer; cerebral palsy; paralysis; pulmonary embolus; spinal cord injury; strokes, heart attacks; brain injury; breast cancer; birth injury; tools, sponges, towels or objects left behind in your body after surgery; surgery on the wrong site; treatment without your informed consent; being given the wrong medication or the wrong dose; being treated with unsterile equipment; or a misdiagnosis or failure to diagnose a serious condition.
The civil tort of assault is premised on the fact that a person says something or otherwise implies that he or she will have some type of harmful or offensive contact with the victim and the victim has reasonable apprehension of this contact occurring. This tort does not require that the contact actually occur, but merely requires that the victim has the apprehension that it will. In the medical context, this may occur if a doctor threatens to take medical action against the patient’s will.
You withheld information from the doctor or gave misleading information to the doctor which might have aided or hindered the doctor’s ability to diagnose the problem. For example, if you tell the doctor that you don’t smoke even though you do, than the doctor may not be able to properly diagnose that you have developed lung cancer or other respiratory illnesses.
That claim is supported by data collected by Diederich Healthcare, one of the nation’s largest medical malpractice insurers. The data shows that in 2016, more than $3.8 billion was paid out to plaintiffs for medical malpractice claims nationwide. When those payouts were broken down by the severity of patient injury, death, at 31 percent, was the most common reason for a medical malpractice claim. That was followed by significant permanent injury at 18 percent, and major permanent injury at 17 percent.
Medical malpractice claims don't only cover errors in diagnosis and treatment. Once you've established a doctor-patient relationship, the doctor owes you a duty of care and treatment with the degree of skill, care, and diligence as possessed by, or expected of, a reasonably competent physician under the same or similar circumstances. Part of that duty of care is to be forthcoming with your diagnosis, treatment options and prognosis, as reasonably competent physicians would not lie to their patients.
×