Nuisance/Frivolous Malpractice Litigation

[Aether2000]

I have completed an in-depth study of a 6 month window of litigation for medical malpractice in Indiana filed in 2004: There were 474 closed and 38 open cases from that time. Of the closed cases, 79.5% resulted in no payment, 9.7% resulted in settlement with an average of $61,900. The remaining 11% of cases paid malpractice claims from the patient compensation fund averaging $941,000. Of the cases that went to panel and were found not to have malpractice, there was only a 5% chance of the plaintiff ever receiving any payment averaging $754,000 for those receiving payment. Of cases that went to panel and malpractice was found, there was a 66% chance of the plaintiff receiving payment with an average of $514,000 per payment. For panel decisions that were mixed or "Matter in Fact", there was a 39% chance the plaintiff would receive any payment with payment avering $681,000. In situations where there was a panel but either insufficient information was supplied to the panel to make a decision or a settlement occurred before any opinion was rendered, there was a 19.6% chance of receiving a payment with an average of $140,000. For situations where no panel was called by either party due to a nuisance suit, settlement, or nolo contendre PCF settlement, there was a 13.5% chance of the plaintiff receiving payment.
Nuisance suits (no panel being called and no settlement, claims closed without a panel opinion and without settlement, cases dismissed by the court due to inactivity (some dragged on for 7 years without any activity), etc) were 37.3% of all litigation: these lawsuits were designed simply to harrass and the plaintiff had no intention of pursuing the suit. 73% of all malpractice lawsuits filed by the plaintiff without an attorney were nuisance suits and only 4% resulted in any payment. Frequently these lawsuits stretched for years without any activity by the plaintiff (in Indiana there is no maximum timeframe to resolution). Overall Failed lawsuits (those without any settlement or payment) were 79.5% of those filed with a cost of millions in defense fees and years of litigation with a permanent unretractable blemish on the physicians record that must forever be answered for on applications for medical staff membership and licensure.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Aether2000]

I am beginning to construct a database of plaintiff names that are in the public records who have sued physicians, hospitals, or DPMs, starting with Indiana. I would like to know what the most important information physicians need when querying such a database for new or current patients in their practice (to be used however you wish):
1. Nuisance suit patients?
2. Plaintiffs that have been awarded large lawsuit awards?
3. Plaintiffs that have repeatedly filed lawsuits?
4. Piling on....family member names of those who filed lawsuits and included their family or friends as litigants?
5. Mass litigators...those who list many many defendants (I have seen up to 18)
6. Plaintiffs that have sued and lost at panel but do not drop the litigation?
7. Dates of birth or social security numbers?
8. Actual documents from the litigation?
9. Active litigation as well as closed claims?

 

[lobelsteve]

i am beginning to construct a database of plaintiff names that are in the public records who have sued physicians, hospitals, or dpms, starting with indiana. I would like to know what the most important information physicians need when querying such a database for new or current patients in their practice (to be used however you wish):
1. Nuisance suit patients?
2. Plaintiffs that have been awarded large lawsuit awards?
3. Plaintiffs that have repeatedly filed lawsuits?
4. Piling on....family member names of those who filed lawsuits and included their family or friends as litigants?
5. Mass litigators...those who list many many defendants (i have seen up to 18)
6. Plaintiffs that have sued and lost at panel but do not drop the litigation?
7. Dates of birth or social security numbers?
8. Actual documents from the litigation?
9. Active litigation as well as closed claims?

1,3,5,6,8

 

[Jcm800]

having been named in clearly a nuisance suit that was dropped as the plaintiff never found an attorney to take the "case" where was never a description of actual damages...i applaud your efforts. guess what state?

 

[SSdoc33]

algos, i have just one thing to say to you:

 

[mille125]

I am beginning to construct a database of plaintiff names that are in the public records who have sued physicians, hospitals, or DPMs, starting with Indiana. I would like to know what the most important information physicians need when querying such a database for new or current patients in their practice (to be used however you wish):
1. Nuisance suit patients?
2. Plaintiffs that have been awarded large lawsuit awards?
3. Plaintiffs that have repeatedly filed lawsuits?
4. Piling on....family member names of those who filed lawsuits and included their family or friends as litigants?
5. Mass litigators...those who list many many defendants (I have seen up to 18)
6. Plaintiffs that have sued and lost at panel but do not drop the litigation?
7. Dates of birth or social security numbers?
8. Actual documents from the litigation?
9. Active litigation as well as closed claims?

Great work Algos....

I would say that 1,3,4,5,6, and 9 would be helpful to me. 8 in certain cases


should this be moved to physicians forum?

 

[emd123]

I am beginning to construct a database of plaintiff names that are in the public records who have sued physicians, hospitals, or DPMs, starting with Indiana. I would like to know what the most important information physicians need when querying such a database for new or current patients in their practice (to be used however you wish):
1. Nuisance suit patients?
2. Plaintiffs that have been awarded large lawsuit awards?
3. Plaintiffs that have repeatedly filed lawsuits?
4. Piling on....family member names of those who filed lawsuits and included their family or friends as litigants?
5. Mass litigators...those who list many many defendants (I have seen up to 18)
6. Plaintiffs that have sued and lost at panel but do not drop the litigation?
7. Dates of birth or social security numbers?
8. Actual documents from the litigation?
9. Active litigation as well as closed claims?

Absolutely brilliant. I'm completely envious that I didn't think of this first.

1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9

 

[PinchandBurn]

Are these stats for Pain Medicine lawsuits or just medical malpractice lawsuits in general?

Ridiculousness either way!

patients may wonder why no one will want to take over their mgt now....

great job on thinking this out.

 

[Aether2000]

These are stats for overall med mal for a 6 month period in 2004. The 2005 stats on are incomplete due to cases dragging on and on. The percentage of closed cases year by year (of initial filing) are: 2004-95%, 2005-70%, 2006-84%, 2007-64%, 2008-47%, 2009-23%, 2010-16%, 2011-1%. It is difficult to parse out pain physicians alone since most lawsuits list several defendants, with the most eggregious (and usually the most harrassing) up to 18 defendants. There is no statute of limitation for closing claims in our state, and they can theoretically remain open forever. On the flip side, we did have a very bad apple in 2004-2005 with one surgeon accounting for 358 lawsuits over a year and a half period. He left the country for 5 years, was found hiding in a tent at the base of the Italian Alps, and is now in prison. Did a lot of allegedly unnecessary sinus surgery but there was also a huge amount of piling on by a large number of non-injured but litigious patients.... Nonetheless, anyone racking up 358 lawsuits in a 2 year period is in deep trouble.

 

[Mister Mxyzptlk]

There used to be a web site called doctorsknowus.com. They basically got hounded out of existence by the lawyers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/national/05DOCT.html

Be careful algos.

 

[Louisville04]

On the flip side, we did have a very bad apple in 2004-2005 with one surgeon accounting for 358 lawsuits over a year and a half period. He left the country for 5 years, was found hiding in a tent at the base of the Italian Alps, and is now in prison. Did a lot of allegedly unnecessary sinus surgery but there was also a huge amount of piling on by a large number of non-injured but litigious patients.... Nonetheless, anyone racking up 358 lawsuits in a 2 year period is in deep trouble.

His story was told on CNBC's American Greed.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40535969/

 

[Jcm800]

There used to be a web site called doctorsknowus.com. They basically got hounded out of existence by the lawyers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/national/05DOCT.html

Be careful algos.

complete BS. they can put us on lists, but we cant put them.

this double standard is why i wont last. We ahve to be all giving, and everyone else can line up and take aim at us, and we are suppose to let them.

see my previous post. I grow more disheartened daily.

 

[SSdoc33]

complete BS. they can put us on lists, but we cant put them.

this double standard is why i wont last. We ahve to be all giving, and everyone else can line up and take aim at us, and we are suppose to let them.

see my previous post. I grow more disheartened daily.

still better to be a doctor than a lawyer. not even close

 

[101N]

Wouldn't this tread be better off getting moved to the private forum?

 

[Mister Mxyzptlk]

IMHO if you screen patients based on previous records (e.g., fired for drug abuse, on SSDI for chronic headaches since age 20) I don't see why you can't screen based on other behaviors. If somebody sued for missing a brain tumor that's not a problem. If they have sued two other pain doctors already then I have a problem.

Here's how the lawyers do ratings:

http://www.martindale.com/Products_and_Services/Peer_Review_Ratings.aspx

Yes, they rate each other.

"The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings evaluates lawyers in the United States and Canada based on the anonymous opinions of members of the Bar and the Judiciary, including both those who are rated and those who are not. The first review to establish a lawyer's rating usually occurs three years after his/her first admission to the Bar."

 

[emd123]

There used to be a web site called doctorsknowus.com. They basically got hounded out of existence by the lawyers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/national/05DOCT.html

Be careful algos.

Nice post. Site was shut down and all charges returned to customers.

Have you ever wondered why it doesn't work for docs to simply countersue anyone that sues them? Not because it hasn't been tried, but because lawyers have stacked the deck against everyone accept themselves. In a lawsuit, ANY lawsuit, the only people who are guaranteed to win are the lawyers. Follow me here:

Plaintiff pays lawyer to sue you and your lawyer (who you're paying in med mal premiums).
Judge (lawyer) gets paid to preside over case.

The jury gets screwed due to lost time from work serving jury duty.
The Doc gets screwed if he wins (time lost in court/depositions/hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars over a career to med mal premiums), and screwed worse if he loses.

Each lawyer get paid, even if they lose! Legal fees, legal fees, legal fees. The judge (lawyer) gets paid.

So, everyone gets screwed accept the lawyers, accept maybe the plaintiff, who, guess what? He gets screwed too because he's got to give his lawyer 1/3 to half!

For now, you only real solution: stay out of court. The minute that subpoena gets handed over to you by the police officer or ward of the court, you've already lost, even if you did absolutely nothing wrong. You're just fighting to keep the score close.

And here's the best part. When a med mal lawyer gets sick, what does he do? He goes to a doctor or hospital, in many cases to be treated by the same doctors he's sued before or their partners! I've seen it happen. Unfrickin' believable.

 

[powermd]

There used to be a web site called doctorsknowus.com. They basically got hounded out of existence by the lawyers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/national/05DOCT.html

Be careful algos.

Why couldn't this be done with an offshore web site, or perhaps a wiki thing?

 

[PMR 4 MSK]

Nice post. Site was shut down and all charges returned to customers.

Have you ever wondered why it doesn't work for docs to simply countersue anyone that sues them? Not because it hasn't been tried, but because lawyers have stacked the deck against everyone accept themselves. In a lawsuit, ANY lawsuit, the only people who are guaranteed to win are the lawyers. Follow me here:

Plaintiff pays lawyer to sue you and your lawyer (who you're paying in med mal premiums).
Judge (lawyer) gets paid to preside over case.

The jury gets screwed due to lost time from work serving jury duty.
The Doc gets screwed if he wins (time lost in court/depositions/hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars over a career to med mal premiums), and screwed worse if he loses.

Each lawyer get paid, even if they lose! Legal fees, legal fees, legal fees. The judge (lawyer) gets paid.

So, everyone gets screwed accept the lawyers, accept maybe the plaintiff, who, guess what? He gets screwed too because he's got to give his lawyer 1/3 to half!

For now, you only real solution: stay out of court. The minute that subpoena gets handed over to you by the police officer or ward of the court, you've already lost, even if you did absolutely nothing wrong. You're just fighting to keep the score close.

And here's the best part. When a med mal lawyer gets sick, what does he do? He goes to a doctor or hospital, in many cases to be treated by the same doctors he's sued before or their partners! I've seen it happen. Unfrickin' believable.

In Med-mal, the plaintiff's lawyer usually only gets paid if there is an award or settlement. Most want a quick settlement. They love suing hospitals and nursing homes - they'll pay a quick $50-100K to make the case go away.

Doctors are a little harder. Doctors rarely settle quickly. We take it personally and fight it like the plaintiff just called their mother a bad name.

Most cases actually go for the doctor. So the plaintiff's lawyer often gets nothing for his time. He's working purely on contingency. The smart ones are getting pickier about what cases they will take.

There probably is a lot more malpractice out there that never results in a lawsuit. Many people are either unaware of the substandard care they got, or they dont want the hassel.

But I still think America would be better off if 2/3rd of the lawyers had been drowned at birth...

 

[emd123]

In Med-mal, the plaintiff's lawyer usually only gets paid if there is an award or settlement. Most want a quick settlement. They love suing hospitals and nursing homes - they'll pay a quick $50-100K to make the case go away.

Doctors are a little harder. Doctors rarely settle quickly. We take it personally and fight it like the plaintiff just called their mother a bad name.

Most cases actually go for the doctor. So the plaintiff's lawyer often gets nothing for his time. He's working purely on contingency. The smart ones are getting pickier about what cases they will take.

There probably is a lot more malpractice out there that never results in a lawsuit. Many people are either unaware of the substandard care they got, or they dont want the hassel.

But I still think America would be better off if 2/3rd of the lawyers had been drowned at birth...

Unfortunately, the contingency cases are where they work for free only because they know that have a slam dunk sure win, ie, " I work for free but when we win I get 50%", vs the typical " you pay as we go and I get 30% if we win"

The exception that proves the rule.