|
|
|
|
Search
03/04/2025
RESPONSES/COMMENTS (PM JURY VERDICT REPORTER - PART 1A
From: Jay Grife, DPM, JD
Dr. Borreggine: there are two sides to your suggestion of maintaining large malpractice coverage limits. Initially the survey quoted is primarily MD summaries and doesn’t reflect DPM awards or settlements. Most are within much lower limits. Also consider that lawyers are businessmen. If a potential defendant has a low-limits policy and it costs approximately $50-60,000 to take a case to trial, where is the pot of gold the doctor suggests awaits that lawyer? Do the math. I am not advocating doctors should go bare, albeit that takes away any impetus for a lawyer to accept a malpractice case; I am suggesting a doctor maintain insurance limits coordinated to their internal risks.
As an aside, expert witnesses are bought and sold by plaintiff and defendant lawyers. Those experts are a detriment to anyone associated with litigation but are simply what the system is. I have a gallery of cases which display blatant negligence yet experts opine it is the standard of care. As a DPM and JD, I would never retain a hired gun expert because it perverts justice for the client and defendant.
Finally, when the state boards allow doctors with numerous lawsuits for malpractice to retain licensure to hurt future patients, there is a problem. It is more common than you might believe.
Jay Grife, DPM, JD, Saint Johns, FL
There are no more messages in this thread.
|
| |
|
|
