Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Michael J. Sacopulos, Esq.

A New York trial court judge received word that a juror had conducted some independent research during the trial by performing “google” searches on the parties. Upon questioning, the juror admitted that he had “googled” the parties and gave the excuse that he was “curious.” Apparently he wasn’t the only curious juror. The trial court judge went on to question the remaining jurors. Eight of his fellow jurors also admitted to conducting independent internet searches. That is nine (9) out of the twelve (12) jurors. The judge was forced to declare a mistrial. This is not an isolated incident. In another case, a juror was uncertain whether a defendant was guilty or not. What did she do? She conducted a poll on her Facebook page. This also resulted in a mistrial.

The social media revolution has inflamed other aspects of the trial process. Attorneys now devote effort to reviewing the other party’s social media use. Information that you post for friends or colleagues may well end up as a piece of evidence in a trial. A simple rant posting following an unpleasant appointment or difficult staff encounter reported in a Tweet could end up as a line of questioning in your deposition or trial. Social media sites have become a new frontier for lawyers to explore in litigation so be careful what you post.

Here are some tips on how to protect yourself:

Read more

Michael J. Sacopulos, Esq.

An doctor was sued several weeks ago for her use of a healthcare financing company. The suit was brought as a class action and is based upon consumer fraud laws. The allegations center around the way the credit application was presented and when it was signed by the patient. The patient claims that she did not understand that she was signing a credit application and that the practice performed unnecessary work in an effort to collect the entire amount of her line of credit. The doctor needs to prepare for a long, painful process. This is not a medical malpractice case, so normal professional liability policies will not cover it. Further, given the general public’s current hostility towards finance firms, there is a risk to taking the case to a jury.

Basically, this is a predatory lending case. Predatory lending is a general description for activities that violate consumer laws. A common element to most predatory lending cases include the lender or lender’s agent engaging in fraud or deception to conceal the true nature of the loan obligation from an unsuspecting or unsophisticated borrower. This means that a practice could be sued based on what information was presented to a patient or for how a signature of the application was secured.

It seems that this doctor is not alone.

Read more

Michael Kirsch, M.D. – author, MD Whistleblower

When lawyers talk, I listen. Two attorneys penned a piece on medical malpractice reform in the April 21st issue of The New England Journal of Medicine, the most prestigious medical journal on the planet. Here is an excerpt from their article, New Directions in Medical Liability Reform.

The best estimates are that only 2 to 3% of patients injured by negligence file claims, only about half of claimants recover money, and litigation is resolved discordantly with the merit of the claim (i.e., money is awarded in nonmeritorious cases or no money is awarded in meritorious cases) about a quarter of the time.

This is not self-serving drivel spewed forth by greedy, bitter doctors, but a view offered by attorneys, esteemed officers of the court. Apply the statistics in their quote to your profession. Would you be satisfied if your efforts were benefiting 2-3% of your customers or clients? Would this performance level give me bragging rights as a gastroenterologist? Perhaps, I should attach a new slogan to my business card.

Michael Kirsch, MD

Gastroenterologist

Correct Diagnosis and Treatment in 2-3% of Cases

We would have to build a second waiting room to accommodate the crowds of new patients who would be jamming in to see me.

Read more

Michael J. Sacopulos, Esq.

There have been several recent cases involving Facebook that have been released. These cases continue to show how social media has permeated our society. They also show a darker side of social media. Although not directly related to the health care world, I think that they provide some useful lessons. But first the cases…

Several weeks ago a Connecticut judge ordered a couple in the midst of a divorce an exchange of passwords for Facebook and dating websites. The husband’s lawyer argued, that postings by the wife, were evidence of her inability to take care of the couple’s children. The husband was arguing for full custody. The court agreed that this might produce irrelevant information in order for the wife to disclose Facebook and dating website passwords. The court agreed it might provide irrelevant information and ordered that the husband and wife exchange Facebook and dating website passwords. Finally the court went on to order that neither spouse may post messages pretending to be the other.

Read more

Jeff Segal, MD, JD, FACS

A recent study in New England Journal Medicine shed light on the frequency of litigation against doctors. For high risk specialties, such as neurosurgeons and cardiothoracic surgeons, the annual rate approached 20% a year. For general surgeons, the rate was 15% per year; for plastic surgery, the rate was 13% per year.

The same study noted that plaintiffs received an award in only 1 of 5 cases.

A more recent study in the Journal of American College of Surgeons examined the effect this litigation had on surgeons.

Seven thousand surgeons (29%) in the professional society returned surveys.

Involvement in a recent malpractice suit was reported by 24.6% responding surgeons. Surgeons involved in a recent malpractice suit were younger, worked longer hours, had more night call, and were more likely to be in private practice.

Read more

Michael Kirsch, M.D. – author, MD Whistleblower

With regard to physicians’ support for medical malpractice reform, the times they are a changin’. These iconic words of Bob Dylan, who has now reached the 8th decade of life, apply to the medical liability crisis that traditionally has been a unifying issue for physicians.

The New York Times reported that physicians in Maine are going soft on this issue, but I suspect this conversion is not limited to the Pine Tree State. Heretofore, it was assumed that physicians as a group loathed the medical malpractice system and demanded tort reform. The system, we argued, was unfair, arbitrary, and expensive. It missed most cases of true medical negligence. It lit the fuse that exploded the practice of defensive medicine. Rising premiums drove good doctors out of town or out of practice.

What happened? The medical malpractice system is as unfair as ever. Tort reform proposals are still regarded as experimental by the reigning Democrats in congress and in the White House. The reason that this issue has slipped in priority for physicians is because our jobs have changed.

Read more