Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

AVoiceOfReason · 08-18-2005, 08:05 PM

I'm familiar with medical malpractices cases, and know what kind of evidence is presented in cases of this nature as to the costs of caring for a severely damaged child for the rest of his life. Life care planners testify as to the expenses that will be expected--based largely on what have already incurred.

As for the delay in filing the suit, there are many reasons why this could be. First, until the child has grown a bit, there may not be a realization as to the full extent of the damages. Second, when a child is involved, the statute of limitations in most states doesn't start running as it does against an adult. Third, there were probably negotiations that took place before filing suit. I often will try to settle a case for awhile before taking it out of the insurance adjuster's hands and having it turned over to the legal department.

The settlement is also fairly common; the parties may have agreed to what is called a 'high/low' arrangement, in which the litigants have already determined what their best and worst results will be. The plaintiff will agree to this to make sure they don't get the big ZERO at trial, while the defendant insurance company will make sure they don't get put on the hook for more money than they contracted to provide in the event of negligence being found. IF this is the case (and I don't know it for sure based on what I read here), then the insurance company had already determined that the doctor had fouled up, and they weren't likely to be able to bamboozle a jury into thinking otherwise.

As in MOST jury verdicts, I'm comfortable that my fellow citizens that heard the entire case and were instructed in the law knew more about what the right thing was, and did it. The exceptions are the ones that make the news, as well as the ones where an old record was broken.

08-18-2005, 08:05 PM	#6 (permalink)
AVoiceOfReason Psycho Location: Greenwood, Arkansas	I'm familiar with medical malpractices cases, and know what kind of evidence is presented in cases of this nature as to the costs of caring for a severely damaged child for the rest of his life. Life care planners testify as to the expenses that will be expected--based largely on what have already incurred. As for the delay in filing the suit, there are many reasons why this could be. First, until the child has grown a bit, there may not be a realization as to the full extent of the damages. Second, when a child is involved, the statute of limitations in most states doesn't start running as it does against an adult. Third, there were probably negotiations that took place before filing suit. I often will try to settle a case for awhile before taking it out of the insurance adjuster's hands and having it turned over to the legal department. The settlement is also fairly common; the parties may have agreed to what is called a 'high/low' arrangement, in which the litigants have already determined what their best and worst results will be. The plaintiff will agree to this to make sure they don't get the big ZERO at trial, while the defendant insurance company will make sure they don't get put on the hook for more money than they contracted to provide in the event of negligence being found. IF this is the case (and I don't know it for sure based on what I read here), then the insurance company had already determined that the doctor had fouled up, and they weren't likely to be able to bamboozle a jury into thinking otherwise. As in MOST jury verdicts, I'm comfortable that my fellow citizens that heard the entire case and were instructed in the law knew more about what the right thing was, and did it. The exceptions are the ones that make the news, as well as the ones where an old record was broken. __________________ AVOR A Voice Of Reason, not necessarily the ONLY one.