Medical Negligence

July 15, 2009

SVMIC – 2008 Financial Results – Part 2

Our last post discussed State Volunteer Mutual Insurance Company’s $251,321,000 policyholder surplus. This post will discuss other aspects of the company’s finances.

As of December 31, 2008, SVMIC had total assets of $1,324,500,000 assets. (That’s $1.3 Billion). The vast majority of those assets are in government (federal, state and local) and corporate bonds, although the company does have some stock holdings ($53M). The conservative allocation of monies among these investment vehicles resulted in only a very small loss in investments in 2008. The loss on the value of these investments sold was only $1.7M, although the the investments that continued to be held had a decline in value of about $23M.

The total revenues of the company in 2008 were down about $12,000,000 to $246,000,000. It is important to note that the number of policyholders decreased from 16,155 to 15,501, which certainly had an impact on revenue.

July 13, 2009

SVMIC – 2008 Financial Results – Part 1

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

SVMIC continues to enjoy wonderful profitability, even as the number of physicians it insures declines.

SVMIC – State Volunteer Mutual Insurance Company – is a physician-owned insurance company that was created over 30 years ago. It has grown from a company with paid-in capital of $7,500,000 to a entity with a policyholder surplus (think: net worth) of $251,321,321.

Let me explain what that means. Policyholder surplus is determined by subtracting reserves for claims payments and claims expenses from assets. Each time a claim is made a reserve is set. The size of the reserve is based on the severity of the claim, the likelihood of payment and the anticipated defense costs. The amount reserved on a claim changes over time, but the idea is that the sum total of reserves should pay all existing claims and all future defense costs. There is also a category of reserves known as IBNR – Incurred But Not Reported. This is for claims that the company "knows" to be out there but have not yet been reported to the company.

July 12, 2009

ER Docs in Arizona Get Special Treatment in Courtrooms

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

Torts Prof lets us know that the elected representatives in Arizona believe that ER doctors should not be held responsible for their negligence unless the patient can prove his case by clear and convincing evidence.

July 6, 2009

Georgia Supreme Court Reverses Med Mal Verdict Because of Error in Jury Instructions

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

Georgia has a pattern jury instruction called the "hindsight" instruction. It provides as follows:

In a medical malpractice action, a defendant cannot be found negligent on the basis of an assessment of a patient’s condition that only later, in hindsight, proves to be incorrect as long as the initial assessment was made in accordance with reasonable standards of medical care. In other words, the concept of negligence does not include hindsight. Negligence consists of not foreseeing and guarding against that which is probable and likely to happen, not against that which is only remotely and slightly possible.

In Smith v. Finch , S08G1845 (Ga. June 29, 2009) the Georgia Supreme Court reversed a jury verdict for the defense and held that this instruction should not have been given. The court said as follows:

July 1, 2009

Article on the New Medical Malpractice Notice and Certificate of Good Faith Legislation

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

My article on the new medical malpractice notice and certificate of good faith legislation (which goes into effect today, July 1) made the cover of the July edition of the Tennessee Bar Journal. Here is the article.

Anyone who practices in the field of medical negligence needs to become familiar with this legislation. This article will give you an easy way to get up to speed on this new law.

June 29, 2009

“Other Bad Act” Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases

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

Sometimes a lawyer representing a patient in a medical malpractice trial may want to introduce evidence of "bad acts" of a health care provider or a provider’s expert witness. This article from the Medical Malpractice Newsletter published by the Hinshaw & Culbertson tells us how the defense is going to attempt to keep that information from the jury.

June 23, 2009

ACOG Changes FHR Monitoring Guidelines

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

From ACOG’s Press Release:

Refinements of the definitions, classifications, and interpretations of fetal heart rate (FHR) monitoring methods were issued today in new guidelines released by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). The objective of the guidelines is to reduce the inconsistent use of common terminology and the wide variability that sometimes occurs in FHR interpretations. ACOG’s Practice Bulletin, published in the July 2009 issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology, supports the recommendations of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child and Health Development workshop* on electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) held in April 2008.

…

June 15, 2009

President’s Speech to the AMA

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

Here it is.

An excerpt:

Now, I recognize that it will be hard to make some of these changes if doctors feel like they are constantly looking over their shoulder for fear of lawsuits. Some doctors may feel the need to order more tests and treatments to avoid being legally vulnerable. That’s a real issue. And while I’m not advocating caps on malpractice awards which I believe can be unfair to people who’ve been wrongfully harmed, I do think we need to explore a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first, let doctors focus on practicing medicine, and encourage broader use of evidence-based guidelines. That’s how we can scale back the excessive defensive medicine reinforcing our current system of more treatment rather than better care.

June 15, 2009

NYT Reports President Is Talking About Restricting Med Mal Suits

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

Here is the article from today’s New York Times.

June 12, 2009

UPDATE on Medical Malpractice Notice and Certificate of Good Faith Statute

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

SB 2109 passed the Senate at 11:36 on June 4 and is now on its way to the Governor’s desk. The Bill passed the House (HB2233) in May. UPDATE: The Governor signed the legislation on June 11. Click here for information on the June 15 seminar on this important bill.

The bill dramatically changes the law that came into effect just last October 1, and impacts both the pre-suit notice and the certificate of merit provisions. The effective date of the bill is a little tricky and bears careful study, but the notice provisions come into effect July 1, 2009.

Generally speaking, the law makes it easier to give notice of a potential medical malpractice claim and gives more specifics about what the notice must say. It also requires that the claimant provide a HIPPA-compliant authorization with the notice.