St. Cloud, Minnesota

HomeMinnesotaSt. Cloud

Email Mike Bryant Mike Bryant on LinkedIn Mike Bryant on Twitter Mike Bryant on Facebook Mike Bryant on Avvo
Mike Bryant
Mike Bryant
Attorney • (800) 770-7008

The Hypocrisy in Medical Malpractice Debate


There are so many things to look at in the ridiculous claims that are often made by tort reform proponents who call for medical malpractice changes. Two areas that often come up are cost savings and the argument that doctors get sued all the time.

A couple of recent items caught my eye concerning each of these topics:

- There is so much fraud out there in the health care system. Sure there can be cost saving if you simple rewrite the Constitution and take away people’s right to sue. You would still have society having to pay for all of the damage that was left behind. But, shouldn’t we start with the Medicare fraud that is out there?

The Washington Post recently reported that :

Miami health-care executive Larry Duran orchestrated one of the largest Medicare frauds in U.S. history, submitting more than $205 million in phony claims and landing a record-breaking 50-year prison sentence for his crimes.

But another piece of Duran’s scheme also caught the eye of prosecutors. They say he extended his fraud through his lobbying efforts, all aimed at getting official Washington to make it easier for mental health centers such as his to make money.

An advocacy group he helped set up, the National Association for Behavioral Health (NABH), has spent more than $750,000 on lobbying efforts over the past five years, including staging “fly-ins” on Capitol Hill and providing advice to group members on how to get around Medicare denials, according to the Justice Department. The group also held fundraisers for lawmakers such as Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and former congressman Kendrick B. Meek (D-Fla.), records show.

There is a lot of money out there that is simply being stolen and doesn’t seem to be as important to the tort reformers. There needs to be a crack down on the real problems in the system.

- Poptorts took a look at how doctors aren’t really afraid of the courtroom as long as they are suing. Including a United States Supreme Court case where they are fighting to have the right to bring the suit. As is pointed out:

Imagine not being able to bring a lawsuit in a situation like this, when doctors have clearly been wronged, and when the poor are going to suffer for it, right?

If only the ER docs saw the same value helping poor folks get proper treatment like this as helping some of those same patients who are negligently injured. For example, last November, we wrote about Florida legislation that would give ER doctors who treat Medicaid patients "sovereign immunity," and cap their liability for committing medical negligence against the poor at $100,000.

I wonder if they really understand the hypocrisy and simply don’t care?


Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

  1. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    In other words, doctors are now taking the “Hypocrisy Oath” instead of the Hippocratic Oath. No surprise.

    Providing a link to a video showing the collateral damage left behind Governor Rick Perry’s 2003 Tort Reform Act. This video substantiates your post.


    If you can not access link, just Google Cleveland Mark Mitchell, then click on youtube Cleveland Mark Mitchell December 12 1950 – April 26 2008.

    Thank you for your time.

  2. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Another example is a letter written by Mrs. Mae Rooks which is posted on the Medina County Texas Dems website. She wrote a straight forward no nonsense letter stating exactly what happened to her son and how the medical community is allowed to get away with, dare I say it, murder. The woman who has the website has been taking an active interest in Tort Reform ever since Mrs. Rooks and I emailed her letters and provided videos to get her attention. It is a amazing how many people do not understand what Tort Reform is until it is too late. The website is:


  3. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    thanks for the very helpful and informative comments and thanks for taking the time to read my post.

  4. Ben Rush MD says:
    up arrow

    You conflate fraud w malpractice – and apparently get away w it. Well played, but your Jedi mind tricks only work on the weak-minded.

  5. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Rush apparently you are only half reading again. The point is that the money to be saved isn’t in giving immunity to butchers and those that don’t do the job they are so well paid to do. Thanks again for stopping by.

  6. jc says:
    up arrow

    I am a strong supporter of Texas tort reform and it should be expanded to all states. 80% of the time plaintiff attorneys lose when they go to court. Hard to find another industry in the USA with an 80% failure rate. I watched Cilla Mitchell’s story on YouTube where she talked about losing her husband because of a long wait. I gotta tell you, I have a lot of questions about that story. Cilla says her husband dying was murder. Did she report her suspicions to the police or request a coroner and get an autopsy? Without an autopsy, it gets really hard to determine what caused the death, but the pts family often is reluctant to get the autopsy. So tell us Cilla, did you go to the police and report this suspicious death and did a coroner investigate? Did you request an autopsy?

  7. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, there you go, running at the mouth again, or in your case, the keyboard. If you really listened to the video, I stated, “In my opinion, that is murder.”

  8. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    So JC takes the personal claims against his practice (are you willing to admit that is what drives your late night comments?) to attack another persons comments. Very sad indeed.
    What about that oath you took?
    The rest of the comment is your usual misguided drivel.
    The numbers are wrong and you don’t really care. Because as you have been informed many times things are not better in Texas, in fact the costs are still high, the poor are finding it harder to get treatment, and when malpractice does happen most people have no remedy.

  9. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey–Wrong again! Malpractice insurance costs are the lowest in Texas compared with anywhere else! A colleague of mine pays a third of what I pay for similar risk. I think Texas is taking a step in the right direction. My hope is that we eventually junk malpractice litigation in favor of medical courts. Hey, we have manditory arbitration for brokerage accounts and Public utility commissions for power outages. Why not medical courts?

  10. jc says:
    up arrow

    I like Florida’s idea of giving soveriegn immunity to ER docs for treating Medicaid patients. In fact this soveriegn immunity should be extended to all physicians who treat Medicaid patients. Medicaid is the worst insurance out there, and docs lose money on every Medicaid they see. They are also the most non-complient and most prone to litigation, so what doc wants to deal with that! Capping damages at 100K is also a great idea, but I think it should be a lot lower.

  11. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Texas isn’t less than Minnesota. You have some proposals that Dr Mangala would love. So we starting ours rants early tonight?

  12. jc says:
    up arrow

    Actually Mikey, I think that Medicaid patients are used by plaintiff attorneys as litigation fodder. James Sokolov or some plaintiff attorney makes a T.V. add talking about malpractice and the medicaid patients think “free money”. So the plaintiff attorney signs these clients up and sues docs with frivolous litigation. Then the plaintiff attorney settles for 10K or less and divides the money between court expenses advertizing (to Sokolov) and the “expert witness” and after the 40% attorney cut the medicaid patient gets nothing. Sign up 150 welfare plaintiffs a year and get 100 docs to settle for 10K and the plaintiff attorney grosses a cool million a year. I call it legalized extortion, what a scam!

  13. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Not heard of that one, I am amazed by the imagination of tort reformers. But assume your fairy tale is true, what does that have to do with anything? It’s not what anyone here writes about or does as a practice.
    Your angry, liquid, nighttime rants have no relationship to what reality is in most cases.
    Even your silly solutions would have no effect on such practices.
    Night doctor.

  14. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -I think medical courts would be wonderful. Think about it, rapid justice in a few months instead of the years that it takes for litigation. Arbitrators and a panel who actually know something about medicine instead of ignorant plaintiff attorneys and their lackey stooge judges (if they only had brains!) This is something to dream about Mike – -goodnight and sweet dreams plaintiff lawyer.

  15. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    “Medical courts would be wonderful” – maybe, but perhaps criminal courts would serve a better purpose. Admit it or not jc, there are PLENTY of Conrad Murrays out there. Any doctor whose recklessness, gross negligence and incompetence is the direct cause of his patient’s death should be tried in criminal court. Doctors should not be able to hide behind their medical license when they kill a patient. And, by the way, med/mal premiums in Texas are lower because the insurance companies aren’t paying med/mal atrocities and victims find the court house doors are locked to them. Another benefit to quacks in Texas. It’s a great place to “practice” medicine when you are never held accountable for permanent injury or death.

  16. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Maybe when negligent and reckless doctors start to get killed and drop like flies, or their loved ones end up dying in the hands of frustrated loved ones who have nothing to lose because the nature of the laws prevent them from getting accountability, tort reform will become meaningless. Laws that are restrictive and favor one section of society over another are dangerous to any government.

  17. jc says:
    up arrow

    Rooks: I agree with you that docs should not be shielded from felony prosecution for any reason. Conrad Murray using propofol for sedation of M. Jackson was obviously reckless endangerment. I do conscious sedation in the hospital and I don’t even use this drug. So without any monitoring or crash cart Dr. Murray (a cardiologist) gave propofol to M.Jackson so he could sleep (No indicated!) and then he left M.Jackson while administering the anesthetic. Dr. Murray was getting 100K per month to do this. Rooks, most adverse events in medicine don’t approach this because all the docs I know have no intention of harming the patient. Most malpractice is simply overlooked mistakes or mistaken diagnosis and humans make mistakes so criminal prosecution is out of the question. The majority of the time (99%) when there is a poor outcome, it is because of the underlying disease process or pt non-compliance, not doc criminal conduct or malpractice.

  18. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, “all the docs I know have no intention of harming patients.” Who in the world works in the health care industry wishing to inflict harm upon their patients? We are not talking about intentionally harming patients. We are talking about accountability for causing permanent injury and death because of human error. If someone is hurt or killed because of an error or faulty product produced because of an error, then there must be accountability. I am in agreement with Mrs. Rooks. Either have the case go to a Medical or Criminal Court. Have a jury determine if a wrong was committed, or not.

  19. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    Medical or criminal courts would be a good solution in cases where there is obvious recklessness or gross negligenct on the part of a doctor that results in a patient’s death.

    Here in Texas, where accountability does not exist, many doctors routinely fail or refuse to read a patient’s medical history or charts, ignore warnings from the family of the patient’s previous problems with anesthetics or bad reactions to certain medications.

    In San Antonio, a plastic surgeon pierced the aorta of a young woman while performing liposuction. She died. Gross negligence? You bet!

    Such cases shoule be investigated by law enforcement or a medical court and NOT THE MEDICAL BOARDS.

  20. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    The Texas Medical Board members are in Governor Rick Perry’s pocket. Accountability from them would be like waiting for hell to freeze to over. He has appointed about half of them, including the board president, Dr. Irve Zeitler, who has failed miserably in policing after his own. The “Founding Fathers” of Texas Tort Reform are Richard J. Trabulsi and Leon Linbeck, who also are “sleeping” with Governor Rick Perry, or scratching his gluteal maximus. With everyone sleeping with each, politically speaking, accountability is none existent in Texas. However, when it comes to instigating frivolous law suits, there is a record of Richard J. Trabulsi, Leon Linebeck, George Bush, and many others who have used the judicial system to line their pockets through frivolous suits. Suing for monetary gain sits well with them, suing for justice does not. Go figure.

  21. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Kraft Law firm has an interesting piece of information on their website about quite a few people who have benefited from lawsuits which were in my opinion, frivolous in nature, but they fought tooth and nail to pass tort reform.


  22. jc says:
    up arrow

    Cilla&Rooks: Accountability is a two way street. Most of the pts I see are really sick and sometimes sick people don’t have a good outcome. Obviously, Conrad Murray should be held accountable. But what about the pt who sues the doc because his stroke progressed because he did not take his medications?
    Should that patient and his lawyer be held accountable when a jury finds for the doc? Should the pt and his lawyer have to reimburse the doc for time away from his practice (shutting down an office for a couple of weeks during a trial costs money) and for his increased malpractice premiums raised to pay for the cost of his defense. Remember that 80% of cases that go to trial are found for the defendant doc – -so there are a lot of these cases running around out there.

  23. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    If a pt fails to follow dr’s orders, he is at fault. BUT if the doctor is warned of problems with anesthetics and proceeds with sedation, or if dr. is warned of serious adverse reactions to certain medications and gives medication causing an adverse event which causes pt death, if dr. fails to read pt’s charts or medical evaluation and fails to note serious changes in pt’s condition and the patient dies, the doctors recklesness, gross negligence and incompetence is solely to blame and the “doctor” should be held accountable. There is a plastic surgeon in San Antonio who killed a patient while performing liposuction. He pierced her aorta. She died. Gross negligence? YOU BET!

    Any doctor who puts his patient’s life at risk for a procedure which he knows is unnecessary and the patient dies as a direct result of said procedure, I consider that second degree murder.

    Since they are protected by Tort Reform, there is no need for doctors to be careful. They can be as reckless as they want because there are NO CONSEQUENCES. Law enforcement needs to take a closer look at doctor caused deaths and act accordingly. The quacks need to do serious jail time for the killing of patients. This would set an example and maybe doctors use more caution.

  24. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Or, if you have a patient in an emergency room with his/her medical records in the computer data base system, and the patient is a 7 day post-op with other serious medical issues who presented himself/herself to the emergency room with excruciating pain, and him/her are left forgotten to suffer and rot without receiving the basic standard of care, and consequently die, is nobody at fault? In Texas, I am sure the only way any medical personal working in an emergency room can be taken into court is if they point blank kill someone with a gun and rant some Jihad slogan. Second, when there are cover ups with bogus and fabricated documentation in patients’ charts, this is a crime too, but tort reform covers fabricated and bogus documentation in this state. Do not even get me started on bogus and fabricated medical records. The State of Texas employees who work inspecting medical facilities and long term care facilities probably supplement their income by taking bribes. Or, they have been working as state inspectors so many years, it would take an act of congress to terminate them.

  25. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, you are pushing the envelope with the “what if’s.” Anyone in the medical field, as you claim you are in, knows when you have a none complaint patient, it is documented in the notes. The facility launches an investigation when they receive a complaint and the likely hood of it going to court is almost none existent if everything was documented. You should know this.

  26. jc says:
    up arrow

    Rooks&Cilla: When you are dealing with really sick people, bad outcomes occurr. If a surgeon gets called into the ER to take care of a knife wound at 3AM and does his best job, but doesn’t see a bleeder hiding in the mesentery, and pt goes on into DIC and dies, you cannot hold the surgeon criminally liable.To err is human & putting good surgeon in prison for a decade and impoverishing his family makes no sense. No one would work under pressure like that and no jury would criminally convict.

  27. jc says:
    up arrow

    Cilla: I have seen docs tied up in endless litigation for non-compliant pts., who did not follow instructions. If you know anything about medicine you frequently see pts who are non-compliant regardless of what you tell them and they run to the lawyer when a bad outcome results. Some lawyers take those cases. Cilla, I watched your video where you talk about murder. You seem to insist that your husband was mistreated. If you loved him so much, why didn’t you just pay an attorney to file a malpractice suit? Falcified documents can be easily exposed, and I am sure that Texas would allow punitive damages in that situation. It sounds like your husband had a perforated bowel resulting in peritonitis which resulted in septic shock and death. Why no autopsy?

  28. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    jc, my dear, ignorant friend! Your post shows just how ignorant you are when it comes to Texas style Tort Reform. “why didn’t you just pay an attorney to file a malpractice suit?” BECAUSE D.A. in med/mal cases, they only work on a contingency fee basis. You can’t just “hire” them to file a lawsuit. As far as “falsified medical records” the Texas Medical Board finds nothing wrong with falsified records.

    It is clear that Mrs. Mitchell’s husband died an agonizing death as did my son. Many families feel that loved ones who have endured so much pain and agony should not be subjected to being sliced and diced for an autopsy. The cause of death was substandard care by the doctor which resulted in the patient’s death.

  29. jc says:
    up arrow

    Rooks: I don’t buy that malpractice plaintiff attorneys only work on contingency. Put money in their hands and they will file any case at any time.It is just like hiring a plaintiff’s expert witness, pay them enough money and they will say anything. The reason that plaintiff attorneys will not take a case on contingency is that they think they will lose. They then tell the dumb plaintiff, “It looks like there is malpractice here, but I can’t take it because Texas will not permit a high enough recovery to justify taking the case.” If you or Cilla had true malpractice cases with egregious medical mistakes, lawyers would take the case on contingency and sue for damages (including lost wages, medical expenses, pain and suffering) and punitive damages. As for falcified records, any lawyer worth his salt has already copied the medical record before a malpractice suit gets filed. Altering the records then stands out like a sore thumb to the jury and infuriates them causing $$$$judgements. There is no way a doc can get away with that with even a half wit plaintiff’s attorney. As for autopsy – -It is pure ignorance and stupidity that prevents families from allowing autopsies. Cilla’s husband was dead and could not feel and autopsy just like he could not feel the funeral home preparing him for internment. Cilla did not want to find out why her husband died, that is why she did not ask for an autopsy. If she had one, she would have known the cause of death and if it was murder as she claims, the D.A. would have prosecuted. She would have had a slam dunk malpractice suit. I suspect that her husband perforated his intestines a week earlier and she waited around for a week to take him into the hospital and by then it was too late and he died of over whelming peritonitis and sepsis and septic shock. Instead of getting an autopsy and learning the results, she would rather go on youtube and blame the docs and hospital and medical board instead of herself for not getting him in there in time. I see this transferal in medicine all the time because non-compliant pts (and families) do not want to blame themselves.

  30. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, If you are practicing medicine, you need to hang up your shingle. Mark did not die of a perforated bowel. You leaving your “expertise diagnosis” comment on my youtube video must make you feel worthy of what little you really know. I accept your comments and you are entitled to your opinions, because opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. You are entitled to yours.

  31. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    FYI jc, my objective for making the video was to find out why my husband was left to rot in the emergency room without receiving the basic standard of care. I am not blaming anyone for the outcome of his surgery because medical procedures are not guaranteed. This is why people sign consents. A lawsuit was never my intention. It would not bring him back. If you listen to the video, I am not blaming anyone for the outcome of his surgical procedure. I was asking a question, “why was a 7 day post abdominal hernia repair with his medical records in their computer data system” was allowed to rot in the emergency room without receiving the basic standard of care. jc, you are so busy trying to defend whatever profession you profess to be in, you miss the obvious point of the video. How do you know he did not have an appointment with his surgeon prior to his ER admission? How do you know what the surgeon found or did not find? If he had a perforated bowel,like you seem to be so sure of, do you not think the surgeon would have admitted him? Am I blaming the surgeon in the video for his skill? I am not even mentioning the surgeon. If you are practicing medicine, you need to find another job because you do not pay attention to details and seem to be selective in the information you process.

  32. jc says:
    up arrow

    Cilla: I am commenting on the sketchy details that you are giving on the video. For the life of me, I do not understand why you did not do an autopsy, which would have defined exactly why your husband died. Then you could have called the police or done whatever you wanted to do. But I guess it is easier to give opinions on Youtube then find out the truth. What did you say about opinions?

  33. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, true, opinions work both ways. Not arguing.

  34. jc says:
    up arrow

    Cilla and Rooks- -I agree that there are extreme cases like Conrad Murray where criminal prosecution is necessary. But the vast majority of malpractice cases are honest mistakes. And docs should be accountable, I am just think the court system is not the way to go. What I want Cilla and Rooks to answer is should the patient or his attorney ever be held accountable if they bring ridiculous frivolous litigation. Should the plaintiff ever have to reimburse the doc because of a case that is thrown out of court or unanimous jury verdict?

  35. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    My son’s case is a rarity and, thankfully, not one that happens very often. The actions of both doctors in this case rise to the level of criminality. My son was a high risk patient whose death was as a direct result of an unnecessary, exploratory procedure. Both doctors knew of his previous problems with IV sedation, both knew that under the circumstances, my son’s life would be in danger. They both chose to ignore his underlying medical problems and treat him as someone in good health.

    What happened to my son was not an unpreventable mistake or the slip of a scalpel; it was a willful, conscious decision and act on the part of two doctors to place my son’s life at risk for a procedure they knew had the potential of killing him. Had he received the standard of care he required, he would be alive today.

    The charges I am making are serious, but medical experts have determined that both doctors were reckless, grossly negligent and incompetent and killed my son.

    Whenever doctors perform unnecessary procedures just for the extra money and have no qualms about putting the patient’s life at risk, whenever they falsify medical records in an attempt to hide their actions, they should (and will be) prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And, jc, if you knew all the facts of this case, you would agree.

  36. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    A person who uses initials and continues to attack using half truths and out right lies is a coward. I have been gone for a while and was only able to check in from afar, but see that you have been handled very well.
    I especially liked the number of times you claimed to know things about the law (punitive damages, what is a good claim, and gross negligence) and fell straight on your face.
    Continue to hide in the shadows and make things up JC.
    Cilla and Anne Mae thank you for continuing to share your information and calling things as they are. It’s real stories that get the message across to the consumer.

  37. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -Real stories like the time a colleague of mine was sued for 6 years for a typogrpahical mistake made by the hospital on an x-ray report for which the doc had no responsibility. The report had no effect on the patients eventual outcome and the case was thrown out of court. Or the Scheckelhoff case where multiple docs were sued after the patients death from natural causes and no expert witness could be produced to testify against the docs. These cases are just as real as Cilla’s husband’s death. (Which she claims was murder without an autopsy or police report) Since plaintiff attorneys have a better chance of winning a coin flipping contest than a malpractice suit, these cases are the ones that I see. By the was, I intend to practice medicine for the next decade or so, I am not going to reveal my identity and risk getting a bunch of frivolous suits filed against me, until after I am retired.

  38. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox: You have proven to be a coward hiding behind initials, made up “facts” , and misdirection in many different threads. To suddenly now come up with even “real” examples really doesn’t change that.
    But let’s see:
    – System worked (why did the defense attorney drag that one out?)
    – Not in Minnesota
    As for being just as real: All I can say is WOW!
    I hope that your patients don’t get the rambling nonsense that you so often display here.

  39. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey: All I see are the frivolous lawsuits. In 20 years my group has had to suffer thru 26 malpractice suits with only 5 settlements. The other 22 cases were dismissed. Mikey likes to use the odd examples of medical malpractice but I see the other 21 dismissed cases which were ridiculous. The reason for this is that any Joe Lawyer can file a malpractice suit. Why won’t lawyers police their own profession?

  40. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox has more “facts”

    Let’s see:
    – Zero went to trial, so looks like your “those that don’t win” number isn’t supported in your reality.
    – Your numbers also means your unsupported attack on the jury and judges isn’t something you have any experience with.
    – 5 settled. Which is the usual way strong cases go. So what were the settlement amounts?
    – Because of your odd math (I get 26 – 5 as being 21)I’m not sure what you are trying to say, but we would need to know more:
    – was every one of the 26 actually sued out?
    – Did every one of the 26 cunsumers have a lawyer?
    – Let’s assume you are all messed up on your legal logic again and say that all 21 were dismissed by the judge. Why the hate for the judges.
    – Now let’s go a step future tell me how many consumers there have been that should have brought claims and didn’t? How many of them were lied to? and How many of them were told the truth and either took some other form of compensation or just excepted their fate?
    – Finally, how many of these involved deaths.

  41. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey: Well lets try and answer some of your questions. All plaintiffs were represented by lawyers. One case went to trial with a unanimous verdict for the defense. In 20 cases, half the time the judge thru the case out and half the time the plaintiff attorney realized that he had no case and dropped the malpractice suit. But these cases took years to resolve. The typo case is one that the judge thru out 2 weeks before trial. My beef with judges is that they seem to be in the pocket of plaintiff attorneys. Plaintiff time deadlines are routinely ignored. Why did it take six years to figure out that a typographical mistake on a report for which the doc was not responsible was not a viable malpractice suit? Why did Judge not let the doc sue the plaintiff’s attorney for “bad faith” malpractice suit?

  42. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    In Ohio the judges are in the pockets of the plaintiffs? I don’t believe that and can assure you the Governor has done everything possible to prevent that.
    What were the defense lawyers doing? Just billing and billing? If 10 cases got dismissed by a judge and the other one by the jury, seems to me the system worked for you.

    The typo case is interesting, because it really sounds like the defense attorneys really let you done or you are not telling us everything.

    As to the Judge ruling on a bad faith claim – my guess is that there was never such a motion or someone was trying to make new law with a case. So how much did the defense attorney cost to bring a brand new claim? So if you bring a motion for a claim that doesn’t exist and lose does that sound like anything you often complain about?

    Now tell us about all of the cases that should have been brought and weren’t.

    Also about the settlements and how much was paid in those.

  43. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey: I serve as litigation consultant for my group. Most of the delays that we experience are due to the plaintiff attorneys inability to get expert witnesses and facts to back up their frivolous litigation. As the cases drag on (I suspect that the plaintiff attorneys are trying to extort money from the doc to end the case.) and on, it becomes obvious how specious the claims really are. The typo case which went on for 6 years is illustrative of how defective the legal system is. In Ohio, the defendant can make a motion for reasonable attorney fees and costs if the claim is not pursued with a “reasonable good faith basis” as my colleague asserted here. This is pursuent to Ohio Revised Code 2323.42. This motion was made and denied by the judge. We understand that judges never allow those claims, so just because the statute is on the books, if judges, who are in the pocket of plaintiff attorneys, won’t enforce it, the statute is meaningless. But delay damages are allowed against a doctor if he unreasonably will not settle a case.

  44. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox, As usual you don’t answer most of the questions. but, what you have said gets us to what may be the real problem.
    Hire someone who understands litigation as a consultant. If you are doing the actual work. Or maybe you do surgery on yourself also.
    Just a comparison of the last two sentences of your last two posts shows how little you really understand the legal world. But maybe it’s a money making thing. Does a longer case make for more “consulting” fees?

    So how many consumers were killed?
    How many never brought a claim?
    How many were lied to?

    Does the family of the dead consumer get greeted by the “Consultant” after they have lost a love one?

  45. jc says:
    up arrow

    Bryant, it is hard to tell what cases should have been brought and were not brought. But the sicker the patients, the more complex the case, the longer the recovery and the more complications. As for these cases dragging out, in my experience it is usually due to the plaintiff attorneys trying to drag out a non-existant case to try and extort money from the doc’s malpractice insurance. The attorney in all the dismissed cases had to know how ridiculous his claim really was and should have dropped the case immediately.

  46. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox: I find the conflict of the first part and the last part of your last post very interesting. So as a doctor you can’t tell us what claims should have been brought that weren’t, but at the same time you expect more from the lawyer.
    I do wonder (because of the way you wrote the last sentence), if all of the dismissed claims were brought by the same lawyer. If so, sounds like he is losing a lot of money. That usually is a big enough disincentive to pursue most cases.

  47. jc says:
    up arrow

    Bryant: The first sentence of my last post was to tell you the facts of medicine. Docs who deal with really sick patients have a higher rate of poor outcomes and we have a higher rate of malpractice suits. It is why neurosurgeons get sued more than family docs. I have seen cases where the doc or hospital has screwed up. But the lawyers and courts seem to miss those cases and pick up on the cases where there was no malpractice, but a bad outcome because of underlying medical issues or poor pt -physician communication. There is a general surgeon who I would go to who has been sued several times such that he now works for the hospital to cover his malpractice. We consider him a great doc, (but he is a bad witness) who is asked to take on tough ER cases with co-morbidities and the pts sometimes have bad outcomes. There is one doc who has never been sued that I would never go to. He has an engaging personality and pts overlook his misdiagnoses. My point is that lawyers and courts can’t differentiate good docs from bad and can’t make the distinction between legitimate malpractice suits and frivolous litigation. The John Ritter case is a classic case in point. Your point about how are lawyers supposed to know what is a legitmate case is right on – -you won’t know because medicine is not your field. That is why we should dispense with courts and lawyers and have medical courts instead. P.S. The 21 cases which were dismissed were all from different lawyers.

  48. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    That wasn’t “my point” or what I said at all. I was pointing out how ridiculous your first and last points were when compared.
    Your new post points out another of your hypocritical themes on how you know about doctors and cases and you are part of hiding them.
    How many times have you posted about what lawyers should do to each other?
    How does it feel to take the oath and to have actual knowledge of people that were killed by bad doctors? That sounds like any other case where we find all sorts of people that suffered, knew, or suspected.

  49. Mark Bello says:
    up arrow

    Dr. Cox: Simple Question. Try not to rant. Numbers only. Approximately how mant patients have you committed malpractice on who never knew you did so and, therefore, didn’t sue you? Second question: How many patients have you committed malpractice on, knew you did so, and didn’t sue you because damage was not severe or because they “liked you” or “aren’t the type to sue”? Third question: How many patients have you committed malpractice on who tried to sue you, but could not find a lawyer because the damages weren’t severe enough for a lawyer to take the case on a contingency (damages too low to justify cost so no “justice” for the victim)? I am reasonably certain you won’t be truthful, but this game of numbers you play is worthless without these figures

  50. jc says:
    up arrow

    Gosh Mark, in decades of medical practice I really did not keep those statistics, but I can tell you, that the statistics you describe are very few and far between. My isolated failures pale in comparison to the 80% failure rate, plaintiff attorneys experience at trial. By the way, there is a new advocacy group out there called “Patients for Fair Compensation” which would like to totally abolish the Malpractice industry and the “blame and shame” game by establishing administrative boards like I advocate to hear these issues. They are currently working on ballot initiatives in Georgia and Florida.

  51. jc says:
    up arrow

    Actually, Mike, I do stick up for the pt in PEER review. In the last two years, I have witnesses two docs stripped of their staff privileges, which will seriously affect their livihoods. I keep up with CME and implement changes in hospital policys to advance patient care. I would like to hear of your efforts to change the legal profession and get specialized training for lawyers who want to practice medical malpractice law.

  52. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox, If that group isn’t funded by Insurance companies and others hiding behind a made up Consumer friendly name I would be shocked.
    You won’t answer the questions and instead make up numbers.
    So if one person was killed was that good cost benefit work? Did you lie to their family?

  53. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox, Minnesota has low rates, no caps, and great care no need to do anything.

    “I stick up for the pt” I would hope so, isn’t that the idea.

    Are the Peers Reviews secret there?

  54. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    Looks like you’re out-manned jc. You’re the only one on this board who agrees with with you. That speaks volumes.

  55. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Dr. Cox, jc, or whatever this person goes by, is contradicting himself. He wrote in response to Mr. Bryant, “Actually, Mike, I do stick up for the patient in peer review.” Yet, in one of the above posts, he blames the patient or the loved ones for the outcome of medical care due to patient noncompliance or not taking the patient to the hospital in time. Dr. Cox or jc, is so cock full of himself he decided to diagnose my husband with bowel obstruction which was never his diagnosis during the short period of time he was crashing and burning on the floor after he arrived from his stay in hell, excuse me, the emergency room.
    Dr. Cox is able to determine this without labs or diagnostic tools in a public format and blames families or the patient for the outcome of their care or procedure and he expects us to believe he sticks up for the patient? Everything he writes is a contradiction.

  56. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Another comment jc or Dr. Cox, stated in his reply to Mr. Byrant was, “In the last two years I have witnessed two docs stripped of their staff privileges, which will seriously affect their livelihoods.” Excuse me, if a wrong has been committed by one person towards another, why would anyone even mention livelihood? Who cares about someone’s livelihood if a wrong has been committed towards another? Does anyone care if a truck driver loses his license and kills another driver on the road because he was too tired to pull over? Does anyone care if a taxi driver accidentally runs over a pedestrian because his wife left him that morning and took their kids? Does anyone care if a policeman accidentally kills an innocent bystander while in pursuit of a suspect in a patrol vehicle? No, no, no. Why should anyone consider someones livelihood if a wrong has been done in a reckless, negligent manner? Oh, that’s right, we have Dr. Cox on the review who states he sticks up for the patient.

  57. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Dr. Cox formulated a diagnosis without diagnostic tools, so I guess I can formulate an evaluation of his personality without the professional use of testing tools. JC, or Dr. Cox, is a frustrated, disenchanted, self aggrandizing, tunnel minded person who is the type of man if a woman says, “no,” he says, “thank you.”

  58. jc says:
    up arrow

    Cilla: In your youtube report you did not give many details of your husbands diagnosis. Pts do not die just because they wait in the E.R.- -there has to be some underlying condition. Yet you claim that there was murder, with no autopsy or police report. No malpractice attorney would take your case. So what was the diagnosis, why did your husband die?

  59. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -do you go to a client after you lose a malpractice case and tell them that it was because of a legal miscalculation which you made during the course of the case and had you not made the mistake the client would have been made whole? I mean, lets face it, if all the claims that plaintiff attorneys bring are legitimate as you say they are, and if plaintiff attorneys lose 80% of the time at trial there must be a lot of plaintiff attorney screw ups to account for that failure rate.

  60. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -You suggest that PEER review is secret and it is secret. But PEER review secrecy cuts both ways. Plaintiff attorneys cannot get PEER review information regarding their malpractice pts or any actions against the doctors. Doctors outside of PEER review also cannot get any information about their colleagues nor can they get any information regarding denial of staff privileges. The reason for this is that no doc would do PEER review if they would become tangled up in slander and malpractice litigation all the time.

  61. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, you seem to bring up the word murder from my video a few times. Let’s see now, Tort Reform prevented me from getting accountability, HR 1540 passed on December 15th, just might be the tipping point for unintended consequences in this country, so maybe now would be a good time for you to talk to your representative and tell them you resent the word murder being used to describe doctors. Now is your chance jc, all our constitutional rights look like they have been destroyed, you might as well go for it because it looks like the Village Idiots are running the show, or rather, the Bankers and the few who have a vested interest in seeing this country destroyed. Who knows, you might win, and then I will be hauled away unable to get legal representation because another one of my constitutional rights has been destroyed. Go for it jc. Be a mench. If something you believe in so strongly bothers you to the point you are a frequent visitor on these blogs, then stand up and fight for it. You can start by manning up to who you are. Otherwise, you are someone who has no credibility.

  62. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    jc, speaking of slander. Did I mention I made another video with the face of the doctor who dropped the ball in the emergency room? Guess I didn’t. Well jc, I sent the doctor a link to the video and apparently he was so speechless, he had his supervisor who is a surgeon and owns the clinic, send me an email writing to me if I continued to contact him, he would sue me for slander. My response to the docor who owns the clinic, ” Go for it, Hoss.”

    Maybe you can contact the doctor and tell him you resent me using the term murder and both of you can get together and press a class action against me.


  63. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox, Your numbers are bad and you have been shown that in many many ways. Do I own up to it when I lose a trial or a case on summery judgment? Yep I do. It’s interesting that one of my best referral sources, from a old client, is a case I tried for three weeks and lost. They know I was fighting for them the whole time.
    Look at my posts beyond the med mal ones, that you like to troll, you will see that I absolutely fight for my clients all the time. I don’t need to hide in “peer groups” and “Stand UP For Them”. (it really made me giggle the way Cilla destroyed you there).
    Now answer the questions:

    How many people did you kill?
    Lie to?
    Send a cold “Litigation supervisor” in to talk to the family?

    And from a case I talked to this week:
    Is it worse to just lie to them or to say “I screwed up and you should see a medical malpractice lawyer” and later lie that you said that or to try to say that you really meant something else?

  64. Anna Mae Rooks says:
    up arrow

    jc.just a comment on one of your idiotic statements – “Patients don’t just die just because they wait in the ER.” WHAT? WHAT? Patients go to the EMERGENCY ROOM because they have a medical emergency. If they are ignored and left to wait, their condition most likely will deteriorate and if ignored long enough, they could die. That is what happened to Cilla’s husband. Your cavalier attitude seems to imply that he simply died of boredom. SHAME ON YOU, “doctor.”

  65. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Mr. Bryant, you nailed it. People do not want to be lied to, period. Many people just want an answer as to what happened, why it happened and what will be done to insure it will never happen again. Lying makes loved ones angry and this is where you possibly might get the one or two people every now and then who go “postal” when they are denied legal representation under the law. I believe institutions or any companies causing injury or death to people are more likely to get hit with large monetary damages because of their lies. Lies motivate people to continue fighting. Lying is disrespectful to those who died and those who are alive to hear it. Lying to me, implies a wrong has been done and is covered up. Covering up a lie when a wrong has been done, is murder in my eyes. A policy and procedure in an ER would not have cost a dime. Revoking a license would not have cost a dime for a doctor failing to deliver the basic standard of care.

    Anna Mae has been lied to and treated with silence in the same way. Her son died in the hands of two reckless and negligent doctors who not only deserve to get their license revoked, but need to spend time in jail for negligent homicide with media coverage covering their trial so Texans can finally see what their health care has evolved into. If the State of Texas did their job, she would have walked away from all this too.

  66. jc says:
    up arrow

    I can only think of 1 or 2 cases in decades of medical practice where what I did or did not do caused harm to a patient. Had they asked me, I would have told them. I will sit down with pts and tell them the good the bad and ugly if they ask. Yet I hear Cilla talk of in her opinion it was murder, yet there was no autopsy or police report and no attorney would take a malpractice case and I have to wonder what was the cause of death and what the facts really are.

  67. jc says:
    up arrow

    On this blog, I have been attacked as “having made up facts” Of particular interest is my claim that 80% of malpractice cases that go to court are won by the defendant doctor. This fact was obtained from my own personal observations along with the personal experiences of a malpractice attorney who works with my group. According to Scott E. Diamond, a Pennsylvania malpractice attorney, he states that in 2009 154 malpractice cases went to jury trial and only 23 were found in favor of the plaintiff for a plaintiff lawyer failure rate of 85% at trial. The next blog contributor who is critical of these statistics should have the intregity of presenting his facts and naming another industry in America with an 80% failure rate.

  68. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox you know that number has been answered over and over again as you have continued to quote it in your various comments here at the Injuryboard. It’s a bad number for a number of reasons , mostly because is a skewed sample that never looks at the whole picture.
    But, looking at Pennsylvania and the 2004 Publican Citizen’s report it still looks like rates went up and there was a out cry about a crisis. Your numbers aren’t crisis numbers.
    In 2009 there were 13 jury verdicts over a million dollars and one over 5 million. My guess is it’s these Doctors that you are buds with:
    · 13 physicians in Pennsylvania have made between 4 and 15 malpractice payouts totaling more than $5 million per doctor, but have not been disciplined, according to the NPDB. Collectively, these 18 physicians have been responsible for 94 medical malpractice payments to patients totaling $86 million.
    But, considering the cost benefit analysis that you continue to make with human lives I can see how one or two dead is just a unasked question. So did the statute pass and now you are willing to write about it?

  69. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -Actually neither myself nor any of my colleagues have ever been the victims of a million dollar plus verdict, nor do I know of anyone who has been. I find it interesting that you were able to access the National Practicioners Data Bank (NPDB). As physicians, we were told by politicians that NPDB records are only available to a doctor doing a self search, a hospital or a licensing board. So how were you able to do searches on the NPDB? I thought that information was kept secret from the general public because of sensitive non-public information.

  70. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -I would like to know why you think the 80% plaintiff attorney failure rate at trial is a skewed number. Seems to show me that a lot of cases are going to trial that are frivolous and that these cases should have been dropped prior to trial. I mean, if plaintiff attorneys are as careful about screening cases and as careful about not wanting to waste money on frivolous cases as you say plaintiff attorneys are, then why isn’t it a 50-50% loss rate?

  71. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Dr Cox You never listen to any answer. The number you use is skewed and you have been show that many times and the more we see from you, we find that you don’t have any real experience with what you are talking about.
    But you use cost benefit analysis to say what does it matter that people are killed, it’s good enough for a day job.

  72. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Mr. Bryant, you nailed it again. “Dr. Cox, you never listen to any answers.” This is why I believe Dr. Cox or jc, or whatever he professes to be, is not a doctor. Everyone trained in the medical field, listens to their patients. Anyone hired to work in a hospital or long term facility, clinic, or anywhere patients are cared for, have to listen. Even housekeepers who work in hospitals and are in a patient’s room cleaning, listen. First of all, it can save their life, second, it is an important part of customer service. If Dr. Cox is truly a doctor, then I think he probably has a lot of time on his hands because many of his patients probably died because he failed to listen to them. I have worked with many, many doctors in my life, and even though I made a video showing Dr. Javier Andrade who failed to listen and dropped the ball due to his arrogance and “Cox-like” behavior, I still have a high regard for the majority of doctors out there because they put their patients first, and take the time to listen.

  73. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    Dr. Cox is so generous in sharing his “war time stories”, allow me to share one with him. I worked in Ft. Worth once upon a time. There was a short, doctor with the “short man’s complex” who was a terror with the nursing staff and hospital staff. He called up one day wanting to leave an order on the phone and started to raise his voice at me. I hung up. He then called back again and asked if I hung up on him and I lied and told him we were disconnected. He started to yell again. I hung up. Third time, he kept his voice to a normal level and we finished the phone call. Same doctor walked in the hospital made his rounds, got made and threw a chart on the table, hitting a ward clerk near her eye. (This was the old metal chart). He did not apologize and walked away. Same doctor got an attitude adjustment in the parking lot by the ward clerk’s boyfriend who was an oil field worker less than a week later. My goodness, did his demeanor change. Watch out Dr. Cox. You never know who you alienated as a patient, a family member or staff member. Too many enemies make for a difficult time getting accountability if something happens to you.

  74. Cilla Mitchell says:
    up arrow

    And Dr. Cox, I had to lie to the doctor I hung up on because I wanted to tell him, “you %$#@SOB****M**, yell at me one more time, and I will *&^%$#@.” Can someone actually say this in a hospital setting? I think not. Do not come in high and mighty and tell me I lied. We all lie. There is not one of us who is alive who has not lied. The patient who asked me, “What do you think of Dr. John Doe?” When the patient asks me about their doctor, can I really tell them the truth? Absolutely not. I tell them, “It doesn’t matter what I think about your doctor because you have to be confident in his/her abilities and if you are, then he/she is the doctor for you.” Or, the dying patient who looks at me and asks, “Am I going to die?” You look right back at him/her straight in the eyes (knowing fully well they are), and say, “Nobody knows when anyone is going to die at any given time.” This seems to give them peace.

  75. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Cilla- All real life stories that explain the person and why we are what we are. Thank You for sharing them.

    You also point out something that we see here in Minnesota. Most Doctors are great. I have no more animosity towards them than I have to all drivers. Even in the cases I’m involved in, rarely do I hate the defendant. Although, I never am surprised that they don’t like me much. (I sued them). A majority of the ones that are sued just made a mistake, usually the insurance companies won’t let them own up to it.

  76. jc says:
    up arrow

    Mikey – -You still never answered my question of why you think the 80% Failure rate by Plaintiff attorneys at trial is a skewed number. You just say it is a skewed number – -move on. It must be a very hard to tell a patient, “Well, if the case goes to trial, I have only a 20% chance of winning the case.” Or do you just not tell the patient of your poor chances at trial? Or do you lie to the patient? Until you can come up with legitimate reasons why an 80% failure rate at trial is not a legitimate number, the number stands.
    You also have not told me how you got ahold of information from the NPDB which is supposed to be confidential.
    Finally, we need to get rid of the current malpractice system of “blame and shame” which only benefits people like Mike Bryant and move on to a system of medical courts as advocated by “Patients for Fair Compensation.” They are introducing legislation in Georgia next month to establish medical courts so that patients can get quick fair and fast resolution of their claims instead of waiting 3-7 years for only a 20% chance of winning an award and with half of that award going to the attorney. I support this legislation and I hope Mike Bryant and Cilla Mitchell see it in their hearts to help these victims of malpractice (both doctors and patients) to support these efforts too.

  77. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    You totally don’t understand what we do. The cost of pursuing a medical malpractice case in experts alone leads to Minnesota lawyers having a discussion about the down side of cases all the time. A horrific case will most likely settle. If it tries the reality is that most jurors like doctors, so these as with all personal injury trials are very hard. We end up turning down large numbers of clients that come to us with problems. But we take the time to talk about it.
    Your numbers are bad for many reasons and you know that has been explained to you many times. But you continue to ignore the truth, the way you ignored those consumers that paid you and you injured.
    As to the benefit to just me, that made me laugh, I thought your crazy theory was that I lost all of our cases. How does anyone make money in your nutty view of the system. But that is the great dilemma for you. Hard to say “they loss them all” and at the same time there is a “great crises that is running all the doctors out of town.” Maybe they didn’t teach you math in that (was it real?) medical school you went to.

    As far as the Georgia idea goes good luck in the Kangaroo court. Are you going to ask to be a “consultant” on that one also?

    I live in the Minnesota system that has a low number of claims, no caps, low rates, and great medical care as a much better system. It works. Nothing is broken.