Articles Posted in Medical Negligence

On June 15, 2010 I reported that SVMIC, the bedpan mutual that insures the vast majority of Tennessee doctors,  reduced its rates by 23.1% .  I also reported that  the company declared a $20,000,000 dividend.  The net effect of the dividend means that policyholders with a history of no paid claims will receive another 8% reduction (or so) in rates effective May 15, 2010.

How can SVMIC cut rates so dramatically while paying the highest dividend it has paid in years?   There are two reasons.   First, as a result of the tort reform passed effective October 1, 2008 (revised effective July 1, 2009) claims have decreased substantially.   Fewer claims means reduced claims handling costs, defense fees, court reporter and other litigation fees, and claims payments.  Since the law permits insurers to "write off" reserves as they are established, fewer claims means that reserves are lower than these would have otherwise been had there been more claims.   A decrease in the need to set aside money in reserves for these "absent" claims increases net income.

And how it has increased.   In 2009, SVMIC had a net income (after taxes) of a whopping  $71, 968,000, an increase of over 100% from a year earlier.  

The Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ordered a district judge to re-consider the fee to be awarded to plaintiff’s counsel in a personal injury case that resulted in a $18M dollar settlement.  The district court had cut the fee from $6M to $600,000.

The appellate court concluded that the district court had disregarded the nature of contingent fee contracts in cutting the award.

The case is Pellegren v. National Union Fire Company, No. 09-1285 (4th Cir. May 18, 2010).

Max Kennerly has this interesting post that sprung from a post on Kevin, M.D. about a doctor who was a victim of poor medical care.  The doctor went to a lawyer, not because she wanted money (she said) but because she wanted an apology.  The lawyer couldn’t take her case because it was not economically viable.  The doctor never got the apology she said she wanted.

I have represented patients in medical malpractice cases for 29 years.  I have been contacted many times over the years by  health care professionals to represent them in medical malpractice cases, and I am surprised to learn how little they know about the complexities of actually bringing the case.  My assumption is  that they have been taught that medical malpractice cases are routinely filed and won, and that cases are resolved based on sympathy and emotion, not laws and medicine.  Anyone with any knowledge of the system knows that is simply not true and, for every plaintiff that wins a brain damaged baby case on the basis of "sympathy" there are five cases in which plaintiffs with valid cases lose because  "Dr. Smith may have dropped the ball on this one but he is such a nice guy and volunteers as the team doctor for the high school football team."

Likewise, I am constantly amazed at how angry these health care professionals get when I  do not automatically accept their view of the case or decline a case because it is not economically viable.  Let me recount a recent example. Note:  to avoid any risk of someone recognizing this event or the people involved, the gender of those involved may or may not be correct and the facts of the underlying event may or may not have been altered.  Those portions of the post that go over the discussion with the prospective client are accurate.

 

The Georgia Supreme Court has struck down a cap on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases, declaring the cap to be a violation of the right to trial by jury.   The case is Atlanta Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. Nestlehutt,  NO. SO9A1432  (Ga. March 22, 2010).  Read the opinion here.

The Court ruled that by "requiring a court to reduce a noneconomic damages award determined by a jury that exceeds the statutory limit, OCGA Sec. 51-13-1 clearly nullifies the jury’s findings of fact regarding damages and thereby undermines the jury’s basic function."

The Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance has released the forms for reporting on medical malpractice claims for the 2009 calendar year.

The reports are due March 1, 2010.

Here are the instructions for filling out forms as a representative of the claimant.  Here is  the link to the reporting form.

Tennessee’s nursing homes rank the 5th worst in the United States, according to an analysis done by the Tennessean.   

The February 3, 2010 article points out that 

[a]bout 15,000 nursing homes nationwide got ratings of one to five stars, with five being the best, from the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The ratings are based on inspections, complaint investigations, staffing levels and other nursing home survey data collected in 2008 and 2009.

The Tennessee Medical Malpractice Claims Report for 2009 (which reports data for 2008) contains lots of information of interest to lawyers who represent Tennesseans in medical malpractice claims. Last week I wrote about the number of claims closed in 2008 and the amount paid on these claims. Today I will drill down a little deeper on one topic – resolution of claims involving death.

About 1960 Tennesseans die each year as a result of medical malpractice in a hospital.  (The number that die as a result of malpractice in a doctor’s office or nursing home or dentist’s office or elsewhere has not been estimated to my knowledge.)  Yet, in 2008, there were 538 medical malpractice claims resolved in cases where the allegation involved malpractice-related death of the patient  in all settings.  

The total amount of money paid to resolve the 538 death claims was $60,663,764, or an average of less than $120,000 per claim.  I hasten to add that gross payment figure includes claims on which no money was paid.  The report does not indicate how many closed death claims resulted in no payment whatsoever.  However, the report does indicate that payments were made in only 15% or so of all closed claims in 2008.  If that statistic is true in the wrongful death area, it means that payments were made in only about 80 wrongful death cases in 2008 and the average payment was about $750,000 per claim.

The Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance has released the 2009 Medical Malpractice Claims Report.  Despite its title, the Report reveals data for calendar year 2008.

This is the fifth report issued by the Department and contains more different types of data than released in previous years because of a change in the reporting law.  Today I will report on some of the data and will address the balance in later posts.

In 2008, there were 3154 medical malpractice claims  closed in Tennessee.  (More than one "claim" can arise in a single case; a claim is defined as "a demand for money damages for injury or death caused by medical malpractice; or a voluntary indemnity payment for injury or death caused by medical malpractice.")  Of those claims 43 were resolved through ADR, 459 were resolved through settlement, 425 were resolved through judgment, and 2227 were otherwise resolved.

The National Practioners Data Bank collects data about malpractice claims paid by health care professionals.   The NPDB has a report that lists all of medical malpractice paid claims against all Tennessee health care providers between September 1, 1990 through November 29, 2009, a period one month short of 20 years.  To understand what data is collected by the NPDB click here.

The total number of paid claims against all health care providers in the United States is 340,463, or about 17,000 claims per year.  Recall the National Institute of Medicine said that there were 98,000 documented deaths per year in our nation’s hospitals.

After the jump I have listed the number of paid claims by type of provider in Tennessee.  The data does not include hospitals or nursing homes except to the extent the payment was made by a hospital or nursing home on behalf of an individual provider after receipt of a written claim or lawsuit.

The Nevada Supreme Court has ruled that a pharmacy does not owe a duty of care to unidentified third parties who were injured by a pharmacy customer who was driving while under the influence of controlled prescription drugs. 

In reaching the decision, the court rejected the arguments that  pharmacies have a duty to act to prevent a pharmacy customer from injuring members of the general public and that Nevada’s pharmacy statutory and regulatory laws allow third parties to maintain a negligence per se claim for alleged violations concerning dispensation of prescription drugs and maintenance of customers’ records.

Here is the court’s summary of the facts:

Contact Information