Stay in Touch
Get sneak previews of special offers & upcoming events delivered to your inbox.
Sign in
06-10-2017 01:39 PM
@I am still oxox wrote:How about an MD admitting the injury he was treating a patient for was not in his realm of experience and letting a patient walk around with a injured bone that eventally died
If you can prove that he admitted that is was not within his realm of experience (he should have referred him to a Dr. that this injury WAS within his realm of experience) and that he died as a direct result of this untreated injured bone due to the Dr's negligence in not referring him, they would have a good chance of winning a malpractice suit, IMO and from my personal experience.
06-10-2017 01:42 PM
@Bri36 wrote:
@CelticCrafter wrote:
@I am still oxox wrote:How about an MD admitting the injury he was treating a patient for was not in his realm of experience and letting a patient walk around with a injured bone that eventally died
I think in this case, the patient bears some responsibility for not taking matters into their own hands and seeking treatment from another doctor.
How long was eventually?
Not necessarily.
The doctor has a duty to properly diagnose the patient and treat him/her in a timely manner.
Agreed. AND if they felt it was beyond "their realm of experience", they had a duty to refer him to a specialist in this area.
06-10-2017 02:46 PM
I have the drs admission in writiing and I never said a person died I said the bone was left with out blood suply and died as a result, yes bones are living.
@KingstonsMom wrote:
@I am still oxox wrote:How about an MD admitting the injury he was treating a patient for was not in his realm of experience and letting a patient walk around with a injured bone that eventally died
If you can prove that he admitted that is was not within his realm of experience (he should have referred him to a Dr. that this injury WAS within his realm of experience) and that he died as a direct result of this untreated injured bone due to the Dr's negligence in not referring him, they would have a good chance of winning a malpractice suit, IMO and from my personal experience.
06-10-2017 03:35 PM - edited 06-10-2017 03:59 PM
@I am still oxox wrote:Has any one been involved in sueing a medical professional and with out sharing too many intimate details how did it turn out.
PS this is not fishing I am on a fact finding missing
Thanks
I have not personally, but I sat through many days of trial. My late, closest to my age older sister, filed against one of her doctors. She died at age 52, from complications of liver cancer, in 1989.
She filed because of her doctor dismissing the pain she was suffering which eventually led to a later stage of breast cancer. Because of this delay she fall into a category of being more likely to have cancer reoccurrence, even after the, I believe somewhat arbitrary, 5 year cancer free belief.
She later had liver cancer with which she lived another, I believe 7 years. Regular Radiation and Chemotherapy treatments all those remaining years. Her Attorney, a personal friend via his wife attending all of high school, told her she had a good case for a Malpractice Lawsuit.
She had several doctors testify on her behalf(which was unheard of in those years), I think there were 4 doctors that agreed, had this been detected sooner rather than later by her, Specialist in his field doctor, she probably never reached the dangerous level of cancer from which she suffered. That jury ruled in favor of the defendant, I hesitate to call this jack*** a doctor, degree or license to practice, be danged.
She won an appeal, which eventually went to our Nebraska Supreme Court. If I remember correctly, they would not hear her case. Thus it ended in failure in spite of what I heard in court, every day of her original trial.
Her specialist had 2 other Malpractice Suits pending against him, and I have my own feelings why this original jury ruled in favor of the doctor.
I sat on 9 Jury Panels, Foreman on 6 of them. Her trial lasted 4 days, with the jury starting deliberating on a Friday afternoon. There was tons of evidence for this jury to see and even hear. Yet they deliberated for just a bit over an hour.
Now my experiences sitting on so many Juries, and deliberating, no way had I been Foreman, would a verdict be reached in that short of time, with so much evidence to go through and talk about. As I said it was a Friday, and the last day of this Jury's 2 week obligation to the County Court.
It was, in my opinion, the Jury Panels decision to get home for their weekend, and not have to return on Monday to continue to deliberate. I was the Foreman on a Civil Case, where we deliberated on a Friday, and all many on that jury were interested in, was a verdict and the faster the better. I made sure that did not happen, we stayed for 2 more hours, and still needed all day that next Monday to reach what I viewed as a "Just Verdict" for the Plaintiff, who had 3rd degree burns over 40% of his body.
To me, many jury panels have a strange thinking person, even more on some of them. First off, they do not want to be there, and secondly their only concern is "their lives", not the ones of the trial.
Long? Of course, does anyone expect otherwise when I have strong/personal, and experienced information to pass on to others?
hckynut(john)
06-10-2017 03:44 PM
@hckynut wrote:
@I am still oxox wrote:Has any one been involved in sueing a medical professional and with out sharing too many intimate details how did it turn out.
PS this is not fishing I am on a fact finding missing
Thanks
I have not personally, but I sat through many days of trial. My late, closest to my age older sister, filed against one of her doctors. She died at age 52, from complications of liver cancer, in 1989.
She filed because of her doctor dismissing the pain she was suffering which eventually led to a later stage of breast cancer. Because of this delay she fall into a category of being more likely to have cancer reoccurrence, even after the, I believe somewhat arbitrary, 5 year cancer free belief.
She later had liver cancer with which she lived another, I believe 7 years. Regular Radiation and Chemotherapy treatments all those remaining years. Her Attorney, a personal friend via his wife attending all of high school, told her she had a good case for a Malpractice Lawsuit.
She had several doctors testify on her behalf(which was unheard of in those years), I think there were 4 doctors that agreed, had this been detected sooner rather than later by her, Specialist in his field doctor, she probably never reached the dangerous level of cancer from which she suffered.
She won an appeal, which eventually went to our Nebraska Supreme Court. If I remember correctly, they would not hear her case. Thus it ended in failure in spite of what I heard in court, every day of her original trial.
Her specialist had 2 other Malpractice Suits pending against him, and I have my own feelings why this original jury ruled in favor of the doctor.
I sat on 9 Jury Panels, Foreman on 6 of them. Her trial lasted 4 days, with the jury starting deliberating on a Friday afternoon. There was tons of evidence for this jury to see and even hear. Yet they deliberated for just a bit over an hour.
Now my experiences sitting on so many Juries, and deliberating, no way had I been Foreman, would a verdict be reached in that short of time, with so much evidence to go through and talk about. As I said it was a Friday, and the last day of this Jury's 2 week obligation to the County Court.
It was, in my opinion, the Jury Panels decision to get home for their weekend, and not have to return on Monday to continue to deliberate. I was the Foreman on a Civil Case, where we deliberated on a Friday, and all many on that jury were interested in, was a verdict and the faster the better. I made sure that did not happen, we stayed for 2 more hours, and still needed all day that next Monday to reach what I viewed as a "Just Verdict" for the Plaintiff, who had 3rd degree burns over 40% of his body.
To me, many jury panels have a strange thinking person, even more on some of them. First off, they do not want to be there, and secondly their only concern is "their lives", not the ones of the trial.
Long? Of course, does anyone expect otherwise when I have strong/personal, and experienced information to pass on to others?
hckynut(john)
What a sad story, John. Out of curiosity, was your dear sister ever offered a pretrial 'settlement' rather than going to court? From the insurance company.
06-10-2017 04:23 PM
Hi @wonderfulworld,
No, my sister was never given the option to settle out of court. She was much like her younger brother. With the evidence she had, I believe in no way that she would have settled out of court.
Much of her objective in filing this lawsuit was to disclose to other patients, or potential patients, the way this Specialist (?) treated his patients. I do know he was no longer referred by many other doctors, and he ultimately moved his practice out of our city.
My sister, though very disappointed, was heartened with the fact that she had exposed this guy for what he was, and she died knowing that he had moved. Now had there be the Social Media of today? His practice practice would have been burnt toast much sooner. In hindsight, I am semi-glad that she did not get a big sum of money.
What my brother-in-law did to her in her dying days was unconscionable, and for that I will never forget what he did to her. He showed after her death how much this money would have done for him, my sister came 2nd in that respect. My remaining family no longer has anything to do with him, even 4 of their 5 children have little to no communication with him.
hckynut(john)
06-10-2017 04:55 PM
John,
Well, I hope the trial caused some grief and misery to the doctor responsible for her poor care and horrible outcome. What is so difficult to understand is that I have seen insurance companies throw thousands away to folks with trumped up claims ( just to make them go away) and here your dear sister who wants to make sure that no one else has to suffer like her gets nothing. You are right...juries are unpredictable regardless of the compelling evidence. Justice does not always prevail.
I am glad that she took comfort in the outcome and had the courage to move forward with it.
And your former brother-in-law....there are not words.
Thank you for your reply.
06-10-2017 05:03 PM
06-10-2017 05:04 PM
06-10-2017 08:11 PM
@Plaid Pants2 wrote:All I know is, malpractice is awfully, awfully hard to proove, next to impossible.
That's certainly true. People think it's easy because they watch those lawyer shows on tv but in reality, it's almost impossible to prove medical malpractice. A bad outcome or a death, even if it was due to a medical error is usually not malpractice. A relative found that one out....
Get sneak previews of special offers & upcoming events delivered to your inbox.
*You're signing up to receive QVC promotional email.
Find recent orders, do a return or exchange, create a Wish List & more.
Privacy StatementGeneral Terms of Use
QVC is not responsible for the availability, content, security, policies, or practices of the above referenced third-party linked sites nor liable for statements, claims, opinions, or representations contained therein. QVC's Privacy Statement does not apply to these third-party web sites.
© 1995-2025 QVC, Inc. All rights reserved. | QVC, Q and the Q logo are registered service marks of ER Marks, Inc. 888-345-5788