Surgical malpractice in California: res judicata
Medical negligence claims are of increasing concern to surgeons. Although noneconomic damage awards in California are limited by the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) law to $250,000, the total amount of such settlements can increase significantly based on claims for economic damages. W...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The American surgeon 2014-10, Vol.80 (10), p.1007-1011 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1011 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 1007 |
| container_title | The American surgeon |
| container_volume | 80 |
| creator | Barthel, Erik R Stabile, Bruce E Plurad, David Kim, Dennis Neville, Angela Bricker, Scott Putnam, Brant Bongard, Fred |
| description | Medical negligence claims are of increasing concern to surgeons. Although noneconomic damage awards in California are limited by the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) law to $250,000, the total amount of such settlements can increase significantly based on claims for economic damages. We reviewed negligence litigation involving California surgeons to determine outcomes and monetary awards through retrospective review of surgical malpractice cases published in a legal journal. This review was limited to actions involving general surgeons. Such litigation was voluntarily reported by either defense's or plaintiff's counsel at the conclusion of the litigation. Data reviewed included alleged damages incurred by the plaintiff; plaintiff's pretrial settlement demand, plaintiff or defense verdict, use of alternate means of resolution such as arbitration or mediation, and total monetary award to the plaintiff. A total of 69 cases were reported over a 20-month period: 32 (46%) were plaintiffs' verdicts, whereas 37 (54%) were in favor of the surgeon. Only 10 (31%) of the plaintiff verdicts were by jury trial, whereas the rest were settled by pretrial agreement, mediation, or arbitration. Of cases settled by alternate dispute resolution, the median settlement was $820,000 (n = 22) compared with a median jury trial award of $300,000 (n = 10). |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/000313481408001021 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1566820896</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1566820896</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-6eca7c4c80adb4d86ea05f06b42c5010dbe9c516e88570f105a48d071e2f287d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpl0E1LxDAQBuAgiruu_gEPUvDipTqT5qvepPgFCx7Uc0mTVLr0Y03ag__elF096GkYeN5heAk5R7hGlPIGADLMmEIGCgCB4gFZIuc8zRXNDslyBuksFuQkhE1cmeB4TBaUU8EEy5cEXif_0RjdJp1ut16bsTEuafqk0G1TD75v9G3iXUg2k41s1KfkqNZtcGf7uSLvD_dvxVO6fnl8Lu7WqcmoGFPhjJaGGQXaVswq4TTwGkTFqOHxV1u53HAUTikuoUbgmikLEh2tqZI2W5Gr3d2tHz4nF8aya4Jxbat7N0yhRC6EoqByEenlH7oZJt_H72YlZS4Yk1HRnTJ-CMG7utz6ptP-q0Qo5z7L_33G0MX-9FR1zv5GfgrMvgF9VG1Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1567796447</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Surgical malpractice in California: res judicata</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Barthel, Erik R ; Stabile, Bruce E ; Plurad, David ; Kim, Dennis ; Neville, Angela ; Bricker, Scott ; Putnam, Brant ; Bongard, Fred</creator><creatorcontrib>Barthel, Erik R ; Stabile, Bruce E ; Plurad, David ; Kim, Dennis ; Neville, Angela ; Bricker, Scott ; Putnam, Brant ; Bongard, Fred</creatorcontrib><description>Medical negligence claims are of increasing concern to surgeons. Although noneconomic damage awards in California are limited by the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) law to $250,000, the total amount of such settlements can increase significantly based on claims for economic damages. We reviewed negligence litigation involving California surgeons to determine outcomes and monetary awards through retrospective review of surgical malpractice cases published in a legal journal. This review was limited to actions involving general surgeons. Such litigation was voluntarily reported by either defense's or plaintiff's counsel at the conclusion of the litigation. Data reviewed included alleged damages incurred by the plaintiff; plaintiff's pretrial settlement demand, plaintiff or defense verdict, use of alternate means of resolution such as arbitration or mediation, and total monetary award to the plaintiff. A total of 69 cases were reported over a 20-month period: 32 (46%) were plaintiffs' verdicts, whereas 37 (54%) were in favor of the surgeon. Only 10 (31%) of the plaintiff verdicts were by jury trial, whereas the rest were settled by pretrial agreement, mediation, or arbitration. Of cases settled by alternate dispute resolution, the median settlement was $820,000 (n = 22) compared with a median jury trial award of $300,000 (n = 10).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-1348</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1555-9823</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/000313481408001021</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25264649</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</publisher><subject>Arbitration ; Attorneys ; Bone surgery ; California ; Compensation ; General Surgery - economics ; General Surgery - legislation & jurisprudence ; General Surgery - statistics & numerical data ; Humans ; Insurance industry ; Legal reform ; Malpractice - economics ; Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence ; Malpractice - statistics & numerical data ; Medical malpractice ; Methods ; Retrospective Studies ; State court decisions ; Trials</subject><ispartof>The American surgeon, 2014-10, Vol.80 (10), p.1007-1011</ispartof><rights>Copyright Southeastern Surgical Congress Oct 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-6eca7c4c80adb4d86ea05f06b42c5010dbe9c516e88570f105a48d071e2f287d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25264649$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Barthel, Erik R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stabile, Bruce E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plurad, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Dennis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neville, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bricker, Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Putnam, Brant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bongard, Fred</creatorcontrib><title>Surgical malpractice in California: res judicata</title><title>The American surgeon</title><addtitle>Am Surg</addtitle><description>Medical negligence claims are of increasing concern to surgeons. Although noneconomic damage awards in California are limited by the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) law to $250,000, the total amount of such settlements can increase significantly based on claims for economic damages. We reviewed negligence litigation involving California surgeons to determine outcomes and monetary awards through retrospective review of surgical malpractice cases published in a legal journal. This review was limited to actions involving general surgeons. Such litigation was voluntarily reported by either defense's or plaintiff's counsel at the conclusion of the litigation. Data reviewed included alleged damages incurred by the plaintiff; plaintiff's pretrial settlement demand, plaintiff or defense verdict, use of alternate means of resolution such as arbitration or mediation, and total monetary award to the plaintiff. A total of 69 cases were reported over a 20-month period: 32 (46%) were plaintiffs' verdicts, whereas 37 (54%) were in favor of the surgeon. Only 10 (31%) of the plaintiff verdicts were by jury trial, whereas the rest were settled by pretrial agreement, mediation, or arbitration. Of cases settled by alternate dispute resolution, the median settlement was $820,000 (n = 22) compared with a median jury trial award of $300,000 (n = 10).</description><subject>Arbitration</subject><subject>Attorneys</subject><subject>Bone surgery</subject><subject>California</subject><subject>Compensation</subject><subject>General Surgery - economics</subject><subject>General Surgery - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>General Surgery - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Insurance industry</subject><subject>Legal reform</subject><subject>Malpractice - economics</subject><subject>Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Malpractice - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Medical malpractice</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>Trials</subject><issn>0003-1348</issn><issn>1555-9823</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpl0E1LxDAQBuAgiruu_gEPUvDipTqT5qvepPgFCx7Uc0mTVLr0Y03ag__elF096GkYeN5heAk5R7hGlPIGADLMmEIGCgCB4gFZIuc8zRXNDslyBuksFuQkhE1cmeB4TBaUU8EEy5cEXif_0RjdJp1ut16bsTEuafqk0G1TD75v9G3iXUg2k41s1KfkqNZtcGf7uSLvD_dvxVO6fnl8Lu7WqcmoGFPhjJaGGQXaVswq4TTwGkTFqOHxV1u53HAUTikuoUbgmikLEh2tqZI2W5Gr3d2tHz4nF8aya4Jxbat7N0yhRC6EoqByEenlH7oZJt_H72YlZS4Yk1HRnTJ-CMG7utz6ptP-q0Qo5z7L_33G0MX-9FR1zv5GfgrMvgF9VG1Q</recordid><startdate>201410</startdate><enddate>201410</enddate><creator>Barthel, Erik R</creator><creator>Stabile, Bruce E</creator><creator>Plurad, David</creator><creator>Kim, Dennis</creator><creator>Neville, Angela</creator><creator>Bricker, Scott</creator><creator>Putnam, Brant</creator><creator>Bongard, Fred</creator><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201410</creationdate><title>Surgical malpractice in California: res judicata</title><author>Barthel, Erik R ; Stabile, Bruce E ; Plurad, David ; Kim, Dennis ; Neville, Angela ; Bricker, Scott ; Putnam, Brant ; Bongard, Fred</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-6eca7c4c80adb4d86ea05f06b42c5010dbe9c516e88570f105a48d071e2f287d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Arbitration</topic><topic>Attorneys</topic><topic>Bone surgery</topic><topic>California</topic><topic>Compensation</topic><topic>General Surgery - economics</topic><topic>General Surgery - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>General Surgery - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Insurance industry</topic><topic>Legal reform</topic><topic>Malpractice - economics</topic><topic>Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Malpractice - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Medical malpractice</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>Trials</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Barthel, Erik R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stabile, Bruce E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plurad, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Dennis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neville, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bricker, Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Putnam, Brant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bongard, Fred</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American surgeon</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Barthel, Erik R</au><au>Stabile, Bruce E</au><au>Plurad, David</au><au>Kim, Dennis</au><au>Neville, Angela</au><au>Bricker, Scott</au><au>Putnam, Brant</au><au>Bongard, Fred</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Surgical malpractice in California: res judicata</atitle><jtitle>The American surgeon</jtitle><addtitle>Am Surg</addtitle><date>2014-10</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>80</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1007</spage><epage>1011</epage><pages>1007-1011</pages><issn>0003-1348</issn><eissn>1555-9823</eissn><abstract>Medical negligence claims are of increasing concern to surgeons. Although noneconomic damage awards in California are limited by the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) law to $250,000, the total amount of such settlements can increase significantly based on claims for economic damages. We reviewed negligence litigation involving California surgeons to determine outcomes and monetary awards through retrospective review of surgical malpractice cases published in a legal journal. This review was limited to actions involving general surgeons. Such litigation was voluntarily reported by either defense's or plaintiff's counsel at the conclusion of the litigation. Data reviewed included alleged damages incurred by the plaintiff; plaintiff's pretrial settlement demand, plaintiff or defense verdict, use of alternate means of resolution such as arbitration or mediation, and total monetary award to the plaintiff. A total of 69 cases were reported over a 20-month period: 32 (46%) were plaintiffs' verdicts, whereas 37 (54%) were in favor of the surgeon. Only 10 (31%) of the plaintiff verdicts were by jury trial, whereas the rest were settled by pretrial agreement, mediation, or arbitration. Of cases settled by alternate dispute resolution, the median settlement was $820,000 (n = 22) compared with a median jury trial award of $300,000 (n = 10).</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</pub><pmid>25264649</pmid><doi>10.1177/000313481408001021</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0003-1348 |
| ispartof | The American surgeon, 2014-10, Vol.80 (10), p.1007-1011 |
| issn | 0003-1348 1555-9823 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1566820896 |
| source | SAGE Complete A-Z List; MEDLINE |
| subjects | Arbitration Attorneys Bone surgery California Compensation General Surgery - economics General Surgery - legislation & jurisprudence General Surgery - statistics & numerical data Humans Insurance industry Legal reform Malpractice - economics Malpractice - legislation & jurisprudence Malpractice - statistics & numerical data Medical malpractice Methods Retrospective Studies State court decisions Trials |
| title | Surgical malpractice in California: res judicata |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-19T19%3A09%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Surgical%20malpractice%20in%20California:%20res%20judicata&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20surgeon&rft.au=Barthel,%20Erik%20R&rft.date=2014-10&rft.volume=80&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1007&rft.epage=1011&rft.pages=1007-1011&rft.issn=0003-1348&rft.eissn=1555-9823&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/000313481408001021&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1566820896%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1567796447&rft_id=info:pmid/25264649&rfr_iscdi=true |