The debacle at St. Joe's has caused a fresh look into every doctor who has been putting in stents by the bushel load. What we are seeing in many cases is not a pretty picture.

I always caution about misleading figures but this number is beyond misleading (through no fault of MVM). The data measures Maryland wrongful death settlements and verdicts in the last 23 years and ostensibly includes only cases of which Metro Verdicts Monthly is aware and, with respect to wrongful death settlements, it is not just medical malpractice cases and many wrongful death settlements in car accident cases are purely a function of the insurance policies available (sometimes in malpractice cases, too, but much less frequently).

Also, keep in mind this data includes settlements, which apparently reduce the numbers significantly. In another MVM study, juries have over the last 22 years awarded a median award of $1,337,824 involving victims over the age of 65 in Maryland wrongful death cases.

Still, you cannot ignore the fact that all things being equal, wrongful death cases in Maryland involving older plaintiffs are worth less - all things being equal - than younger victims. There is sometimes a small measure of logic to this: the economic damages awarded in a wrongful death lawsuit are going to be statistically less for an older victim than a younger victim.

• Malpractice Cap on Damages in Maryland
(cap chart by year of injury)

• Cap on Damages in Maryland for Non-Medical Malpractice Cases
(cap chart by year of injury)

• More on Wrongful Death Values in Maryland for Victims Over 65


• Wrongful Death Lawsuits in Maryland (an overview)

Obviously, we know the cost of bedsores to the neglected patient: awful pain that can be permanent and even fatal. According to a new study, bedsores are the most costly injury to society, resulting in medical costs of almost $3.9 billion. That's the lifetime income for your 2,000 best friends.

After that post, the jury reached a defense verdict after about two hours of deliberation.

It is hard to win a case you have already lost on juror misconduct because unless the lawyers dramatically alter their strategy, a pretty good "focus group" has already given their opinion on the case.

Interestingly, the first case ended in a mistrial after a defense verdict when it was discovered that a juror lied about his role in two pending personal injury lawsuits. Usually when the issue of jury honesty in voir dire is raised, it is almost invariably the defendant after a plaintiff's verdict.

The article also provides some highlights from this medical malpractice trial including this one: "So, you think there are some situations where the doctor can play Russian roulette with the revolver?" As you can imagine, this one drew an objection.

We provide a lot of medical malpractice samples on our website for the Maryland malpractice lawyer who wants to see how another lawyer approaches the workup of a malpractice claim. If you have no experience and understanding of how to handle a malpractice claim, I think you are inviting a different kind of malpractice claim - legal malpractice - if you try to handle the case on your own without an experienced malpractice lawyer.

The gist of the lawsuit was the care and treatment rendered in - of all things - a big toe surgery.
Plaintiff's malpractice attorney won with the jury not only on negligence but on confirmed consent which is frequently a tough hill to climb.

Notwithstanding this verdict, the defendant may well be a fine doctor. But it is really weird to me that a podiatrist would become the chief of surgery. It is late, I'm tired, I keep going back to make sure I'm reading that right. Yep, I am. I've had issues raised as to whether a podiatrist is even qualified to testify in cases where the surgery was performed by an orthopedist.

Hospitals for both the better and for the worse, do not generally attract the entrepreneurial type. This is often a good thing. The majority of health care workers in a hospital setting are focused on healing patients. That's where their heads ought to be. So I think it is difficult to just expect them to fall in line with the rest of the market. Hospital administrators need to look to try to fight this inertia by making sure hospitals are grabbing the low hanging fruit that can reduct costs. But, realistically, there is only so much that can be done without more investment (financial and psychological) in technology.

From reading the article, it sounds like a tough case in a difficult jurisdiction.

The idea is that we should be spending money and effort to think of new ways to resolve medical malpractice claims. I'll be interested to learn if from these efforts any really "new" ways are uncovered. Instead, it seems to me millions and even billions of dollars have already been "spent" trying to solve this problem organically. I can't imagine a few pilot programs making a big difference. Not saying the effort is a bad idea but I'm skeptical as to whether it will yield any real result.