Like any example of medical malpractice, a surgical error can harm the affected patient. Frequently, the commission of such an error qualifies as an act of negligence.
Features of a physician’s negligence
It differs from the sort of action normally taken by a reasonable doctor. A reasonable doctor would have acted differently, if placed in the same circumstances, and provided with the same materials.
Some of the things a reasonable physician would not do:
• Operate on the wrong limb of the surgical patient
• Leave a surgical tool in the patient, before closing the incision.
• Not pay attention to information that was coming from the anesthesiologist.
Possible legal recourse for patients that have been harmed by error made during an operation:
In some states a patient that has considered initiating a lawsuit must first submit a claim to the medical review board. That board consists of a panel of 3 physicians. The board’s ruling could not end the patient’s plans for taking the case to court. Still, that same ruling would become part of the evidence in any scheduled trial. Most malpractice claims get decided through pre-trial negotiations. Those negotiations usually take place following a discovery session.
If a trial were to take place, then the plaintiff could need to count on the performance of the expert witness, the one that was introduced by the plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer in San Leandro.
–The judge and jury would view that expert as someone that was representing all reasonable doctors.
–A good lawyer would select an expert that could appreciate the defendant’s circumstances and materials on the day of the allegedly negligent behavior.
–A personal injury attorney should study the expert’s ability to deliver facts in a clear and understandable fashion.
Understand that the defense team would also be able to introduce its own medical expert.
–The strength of that second expert’s argument would depend on the extent to which his or her experiences suggested an appreciation for the defendant’s circumstances and materials.
–In addition, the same argument could pale in comparison to the one in support of the plaintiff, if it was not delivered in a clear and understandable manner.
–On the other hand, the second expert’s argument could outshine the one in support of the plaintiff, if it helped the judge and jury to gain a greater insight into the challenges faced by the defendant, on the day of his or her allegedly negligent behavior.
Experts play a key role in any trial that was scheduled, following initiation of a malpractice lawsuit. That fact would apply to any lawsuit that had been filed following harm to one of a surgeon’s patients.