Medical Negligence

October 29, 2012

Kidney Transplant Doner Does Not Have Malpractice Claim Against Kidney Donee’s Doctor

The Nebraska Supreme Court has held that the doctor for a kidney donee does not owe a duty to the kidney donor. Thus, when the donee’s doctor allegedly committed malpractice when treating the donee, rendering the donor’s kidney useless, the donor cannot sue the donor’s doctor.

In Olson v. Wren shall, 284 Neb.445 (Oct. 5, 2012), Sean Olson agreed to give a kidney to his dad, Daniel. The initial surgery went fine, but complications later developed. Allegedly, a medical error caused the death of the donor’s kidney in the do nee and it had to be removed.

The donor and his wife sued the Donne’s doctors, seeking damages for the errors committed on do nee that resulted in the loss of the donor’s kidney. The trial court dismissed the case, finding that the Donne’s doctors (who did not remove the kidney from donor) did not owe a duty a care to the donor. The trial court also ruled that no legally cognizable damages were suffered by donor and his wife as a result of the alleged malpractice.

October 16, 2012

Medical Malpractice Victims: Denied Access to Justice

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

It happens almost every day. I receive a call from a person claiming that they have been injured by the act or omission of some health care professional and I have to tell them I can’t help them because the damages suffered to not justify the time and expense of a medical malpractice case.

This has always been a problem, but has gotten worse with tort reform legislation in Tennessee. Caps on damages further restrict access to the courts.

Those in academia are paying attention. Torts Prof recently wrote about a new article by Joanna Shephard tiitled ""Justice in Crisis: Victim Access to the American Medical Liability System."

September 21, 2012

The “Certificate of Good Faith” Requirement in Tennessee Medical Malpractice (Health Care Liability) Lawsuits

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Almost four years ago Tennessee adopted a requirement lawyers filing medical malpractice (now called health care liability) lawsuits must file a "certificate of good faith." Under the current version of the statute the certificate must be filed with the complaint.

The Tennessee pre-suit notice statute can be found at T.C.A. Section 29-26-122. I wrote an article about the most recent version of the statute for the Tennessee Bar Journal; the article is titled "Med Mal Makeover: The New Medical Malpractice Notice and Certificate of Good Faith Statute."

I have assembled a list of the cases that discussed the certificate of good faith requirement. One of the cases is pending before the Tennessee Supreme Court and an opinion is expected in the next few weeks.

September 20, 2012

Case Law on Pre-Suit Notice Requirement in Tennessee Health Care Liability (Medical Malpractice) Cases

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Almost four years ago Tennessee adopted a requirement that health care provides were entitled to receive advance notice of the filing of Tennessee medical malpractice (now call "health care liability) lawsuits. Under the current version of the statute, notice must be given in the manner proscribed by statute before the expiration of the statute of limitations. Exceptions are granted only for extraordinary cause. Giving appropriate notice extends the statute of limitations and statute of repose by 120 days.

The Tennessee pre-suit notice statute can be found at T.C.A. Section 29-26-119. I wrote an article about the most recent version of the statute for the Tennessee Bar Journal; the article is titled "Med Mal Makeover: The New Medical Malpractice Notice and Certificate of Good Faith Statute."

I have assembled a list of the cases that discussed the pre-suit notice requirement. Here are the two cases currently pending before the Tennessee Supreme Court:

June 5, 2012

“They Left A Sponge In Me!”

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

How often are sponges, towels, pads and other foreign objects left in surgical patients? The Doctor’s Company, a medical malpractice insurer, has shared some information that helps us get an idea of the scope of the problem.

The insurer reports that from 2002 through 2011, there were 3,273 surgical claims closed (not including obstetric cases). Five percent involved retained foreign objects, with half of those being sponges, towels, or pads. That means that this one insurer has defended about 160 foreign object claims during the indicated ten-year period.

The insurer admits that the claims are very difficult, if not impossible, to defend.

April 27, 2012

Medical Malpractice Paid Claims Continue to Drop

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

The National Practioner Data Bank, the entity that gathers data about medical malpractice claims, reports that paid medical malpractice claims continue to drop.

In 2001, the total number of paid claims was 20,319. In 2010, the number had dropped to 13,277. Now, a new report released by Kaiser citing data from the NPDB indicates that paid claims for 2011 totaled 9497.

(The NPDB data for 2001 through 2010 is set forth in Appendix D, Table 1.)

April 26, 2012

Tennessee Court Waives Compliance With “Contiguous State” Rule for Expert Witness in Medical Malpractice Case

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Tennessee has a goofy rule concerning expert witnesses that, to my knowledge and belief, exists in no other state.

Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-115(b) requires any expert witness in a medical malpractice state to practice in Tennessee or a border state unless the trial court “determines that the appropriate witnesses otherwise would not be available.”

The alleged purpose of the contiguous state rule is to increase the likelihood that the witness will know the applicable standard of care. The actual result of this rule is to make it more difficult to find expert witnesses, particularly in specialty medical areas or when the defendant is well-known.

April 25, 2012

Tennessee Court Discusses Whether Expert is Qualified to Speak to Defendant’s Standard of Care Under Locality Rule

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Tennessee law requires that the plaintiff present expert proof that the defendant violated the standard of care applicable in the community in which the care was given at the time the care was given. Proof of the standard can come from an otherwise qualified expert who knows the standard of care in that community or in a similar community. This rule is codified in Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-115(a).

In Marsha McDonald v. Paul F. Shea, M.D. and Shea Ear Clinic, No. W2010-02317-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. February 16, 2012), the Court of Appeals engaged in a lengthy discussion of whether Plaintiff ’s expert was qualified to testify under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-115(a). The court’s reasoning was guided by the recent Tennessee Supreme Court case of Shipley v. Williams, 350 S.W.3d 527 (Tenn. 2011). In Shipley, the Supreme Court rejected the notion that an expert must have personal, first-hand knowledge of the standard of care by actually practicing in a community. The Supreme Court also held that “expert medical testimony regarding a broader regional standard or a national standard should not be barred, but should be considered as an element of the expert witness’ knowledge of the standard of care in the same or similar community.”

These two holdings in Shipley gutted the majority of Defendants’ objections to the competency of Plaintiff ’s expert in this case.

March 29, 2012

Medical Malpractice Case Filings Still Below Pre-Tort Reform Levels

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

Medical malpractice case filings were up last year but are still below the filings for the year when the first tort reform hit medical malpractice cases.

October 1, 2008 was the date that pre-suit notice and certificates of good faith became required. In the year before the law change, 646 medical malpractice cases were filed in the entire state. Some 140 of those cases were filed in the month before the law changed – ordinarily only about 46 were filed per month.

Predictably, filings were down substantially in the year ending September 30, 2009 – only 264 cases were filed. The next year filings were up to 314, and the year ended September 30, 2011 there were 378 medical malpractice cases filed.

March 26, 2012

Expert Witness Qualifications in Tennessee Medical Malpractice Case

by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a district court’s finding that an expert witness was not qualified to testify on behalf of a plaintiff in a health care liability action, relying on Shipley v. Williams, 350 S.W.3d 527 (2011).

In Bock v. University of Tennessee Medical Group, Inc., No. 10-5534 (6th Cir. March 26, 2012), the court ruled that Shipley required a remand but also made it very clear that merely determining a witness to be competent to give expert testimony did not end the inquiry. After competency is determined, case law and evidence rules in federal court still require application of the FRE 702 as interpreted by Daubert. The record was such that the court could not make the determination of these issues and thus a remand was appropriate.

The case includes a helpful discussion of the interaction between the Erie rule and the Federal Rules of Evidence and how the 6th Circuit has addressed the issue. Surprisingly, the United States Supreme Court has never directly addressed the issue.