Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Reviewing Potential Malpractice Cases-Reply

Reviewing Potential Malpractice Cases-Reply In Reply. —Plaintiffs whose attorneys retain Dr Coyle to review an alleged medical liability case are indeed fortunate, as Dr Coyle's approach takes into account the costs that must be borne by those plaintiffs to retain an expert witness to review a claim, even where it is determined that liability does not exist. However, Dr Coyle's letter raises an important problem inherent in the current civil justice system—that of access to the system and the attendant costs of access. Plaintiffs' attorneys must hire costly medical experts to review cases and to testify in court in support of the plaintiffs allegations. Those plaintiffs who have lesser amounts of damages often cannot find an attorney to represent them, because any anticipated payment, whether by way of settlement or verdict, will be insufficient to yield an adequate contingency fee for the plaintiffs attorney and to cover the high costs of expert witness(es). In http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Reviewing Potential Malpractice Cases-Reply

Johnson, Ilene
JAMA , Volume 267 (19) – May 20, 1992
Download PDF
1 page

Reviewing Potential Malpractice Cases-Reply

Abstract



In Reply.
—Plaintiffs whose attorneys retain Dr Coyle to review an alleged medical liability case are indeed fortunate, as Dr Coyle's approach takes into account the costs that must be borne by those plaintiffs to retain an expert witness to review a claim, even where it is determined that liability does not exist. However, Dr Coyle's letter raises an important problem inherent in the current civil justice system—that of access to the system...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/reviewing-potential-malpractice-cases-reply-eq0c7YkK4I

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.1992.03480190046022
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In Reply. —Plaintiffs whose attorneys retain Dr Coyle to review an alleged medical liability case are indeed fortunate, as Dr Coyle's approach takes into account the costs that must be borne by those plaintiffs to retain an expert witness to review a claim, even where it is determined that liability does not exist. However, Dr Coyle's letter raises an important problem inherent in the current civil justice system—that of access to the system and the attendant costs of access. Plaintiffs' attorneys must hire costly medical experts to review cases and to testify in court in support of the plaintiffs allegations. Those plaintiffs who have lesser amounts of damages often cannot find an attorney to represent them, because any anticipated payment, whether by way of settlement or verdict, will be insufficient to yield an adequate contingency fee for the plaintiffs attorney and to cover the high costs of expert witness(es). In

Journal

JAMA – American Medical Association

Published: May 20, 1992

There are no references for this article.