How to File a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit In bringing a medical malpractice suit against a doctor or hospital requires evidence that the defendant acted in breach of his or her obligation to patients. This could include hospital and medical documents. Our attorneys have a wealth of experience in conducting effective depositions. They could be doctors, other medical professionals working in private practice, or staff members at a hospital or clinic. Negligence When a patient visits a doctor or hospital professional and receives medical care, they are entitled certain standards of medical care. Unfortunately the standards aren't always met or even violated. This can cause devastating consequences. If someone is injured or suffers death due to a doctor's negligence, they can file a lawsuit against the medical professional. To prove a case, the person who was injured must establish four legal elements that include breach of duty, breach of duty, damages and causation. Malpractice is described as an act performed by the doctor that is against the norms of the medical profession and causes injury to the patient. It is an aspect of tort law, which deals with civil wrongs that are not legally binding or criminal in nature. Medical negligence is distinct from normal negligence in that the person who is injured has to prove that the doctor knew, or should have known that their actions were going to cause harm before they can claim malpractice. Normal negligence doesn't. A surgeon who accidentally cuts or nicks an artery or nerve during surgery is guilty of negligence, but not malpractice. This is because the doctor did not intend to cause harm to anyone. In a case of medical malpractice the defendant has the obligation of treating the patient according to the standards of care that a reasonably prudent healthcare professional with comparable knowledge and experience in similar circumstances would provide. The breach of this duty is a critical element since it proves that the alleged negligence caused the injury. Damages Damages in a malpractice case are based on the losses you suffered due to a doctor's negligence. This can include both financial loss, like the cost of future medical care, and non-economic losses such as pain and suffering. To recover damages, it is necessary to show that a doctor has violated the duty of care, that his deviation from the standard of care led to injury, and the injury resulted in financial losses that are quantifiable. This is a difficult legal analysis that typically requires expert witness testimony. Some of these losses are evident like when your doctor made a mistake that led to an infection or medical condition that required additional treatment as a result. Other damage isn't as evident, for instance, if your doctor has misdiagnosed you and you're unable to receive the proper treatment. You may sue for wrongful deaths in the event that your doctor's negligence results in your death. You can claim punitive damages in addition to the compensation you would get in a lawsuit for survival. In many states, there are limits to the amount you can recover in a legal case. These caps vary from state to state and are generally applicable to both financial and other damages. Certain states also have rules that limit the length of time you have to wait to start a lawsuit. Time Limits As with all lawsuits, there are deadlines that must be observed or the case may be barred. A malpractice lawsuit should generally be filed between two and six years after the malpractice occurred. The timeframe for filing a malpractice lawsuit is different for each state. The time frame can be complicated, so it is vital to consult with an attorney immediately. The law firm will conduct an investigation to determine whether a mistake occurred and if it will be able to stand in the court. This can take months or even weeks. Medical malpractice cases are governed by different laws than other types of cases, and often the statute of limitation is changed. For example, in Pennsylvania a patient must file a claim within 2 years from the time they were aware of the malpractice, or that a reasonable person could have realized that the injury existed. This is known as the discovery rule. In other states the statute of limitations begins at the time the malpractice happened. This can be an issue if the error doesn't cause immediate symptoms. For example, suppose doctors mistakenly leave an object foreign to the body after surgery. The patient might not find the object until three years after the procedure. In this scenario, the statutes of limitations could have started in the year following the date of surgery rather than the discovery of error. Expert Witnesses Many medical malpractice cases rely on expert witnesses to help explain the details of the case. An expert witness for the plaintiff will testify regarding the duty of the doctor to the patient, medical standards for doctors with similar qualifications in the field and specialty and the ways in which the defendant's conduct was different from the standards. The expert will explain how the departure directly caused the patient's injury. The defendant will employ an expert to challenge the plaintiff's expert and give their professional opinion about whether the doctor was able to provide the required care. Experts could differ, but the fact-finder decides which expert is the most reliable. It is more beneficial for the expert to working in the medical field, as they will have a better knowledge of current practices. Judges and jurors tend to find practicing professionals more credible than experts who solely rely on court testimony. It is also beneficial to work with an expert who is specialized in the area of malpractice. For example a medical professional who is experienced in treating breast cancer could make a an argument that is more convincing about the cause of the plaintiff's injury. A medical malpractice attorney in Ocala will know the best experts to ask.