In Ohio and Michigan, physician defendants were entitld to new trials because of lawyers' misconduct.
Physicians have reason to applaud two recent court decisions-in Ohio and Michigan-in medical liability cases. In both instances, the courts said physician defendants were entitled to new trials because plaintiff attorneys misrepresented medical testimony or made irrelevant comments, harassed the defendants and expert witnesses, and improperly appealed to juries' sympathies, according to American Medical News (5/5/08).
The Ohio case, which revolves around the birth of a boy with cerebral palsy and severe retardation, is of particular interest to ob/gyns. The plaintiff alleged negligence against the physician who delivered the baby by cesarean section, the physician's employer, and the hospital where the birth took place, claiming that the infant's injuries resulted from a delay in performing the procedure. The defendants cited intrauterine growth retardation evidenced by fused joints, a grossly underweight placenta, and birth asphyxia as the cause of the child's condition. After a 3-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $30 million: $15 million in economic damages and $15 million in noneconomic damages. On appeal, the trial court granted the defendants a new trial, but a court of appeals reversed the trial court's order, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio.
In May 2007, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate court's decision, citing the trial court's justifications for a new trial. First and foremost, according to the trial court, the economic damages award was excessive and the noneconomic damages award seemed to have been given under the influence of "passion or prejudice." The trial court also described the plaintiff's counsel as "discourteous" and "theatrical" and found that he "intentionally and repeatedly mischaracterized testimony in an attempt to mislead or confuse the jury." The court also said that counsel engaged in improper questioning of his own expert witness, exceeded the bounds of zealous advocacy by accusing the witnesses for the defense of "prevarication," and injected race and economic status into his closing argument by emphasizing the infant was poor and black while the health-care providers were powerful and wealthy.
Severe maternal morbidity linked to mental health risks post-delivery
April 26th 2024A recent study revealed that severe maternal morbidity during pregnancy increases the likelihood of mental health hospitalizations or emergency department visits up to 13 years post-delivery, emphasizing the need for mental health screening.
Read More
FDA approves updated label for Biktarvy against HIV-1
April 26th 2024Gilead Sciences has announced FDA approval of an updated Biktarvy label, showcasing safety and efficacy data from a phase 1b trial, positioning it as a pivotal treatment option for pregnant individuals with HIV-1 and suppressed viral load.
Read More
No link found between antenatal corticosteroids and child neurodevelopment
April 25th 2024A recent study found no link between antenatal corticosteroid administration and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children aged 6 years or older, offering reassurance for late preterm delivery practices.
Read More