Bad Doctors and the Law
Posted by Kilroy 7 years, 11 months ago to Philosophy
I put this in the "Philosophy" category as there is no category that applies. So if I am in the wrong place, let me know,
I had a recent very bad experience with a doctor in Prescott. The experience was so bad that I filed a Small Claims Court suit against him for the amount of his bill. The idea of Small Claims court is a place where the two litigants can come together and say their piece to a neutral party with no lawyers and have that 3rd party make an impartial decision. For small amounts, what could be simpler? But that is not the way it works in reality.
Because of rule A.R.S. § 22-504(A), either party can request that the case be moved to Civil Court. If one side has more money than the other side, this is what they do. This totally negates the purpose of the Small Claims Court in the majority of cases. This is particularly true when suing a doctor. It is pretty clear to me that this rule was put there by lawyers for the benefit of lawyers because once you are in the system your opponents lawyer can intimidate you to agreeing to a settlement where you pay far more than your original suit was for. This is because Civil Court is expensive and if you lose, you pay for everything, your lawyer, their lawyer, damages, court costs and witness fees and maybe even more. In addition, they will make you agree that you will make no disparaging remarks about the doctor in any venue. This trumps freedom of speech and keeps people from finding out the truth about a given doctor. This should not be allowed to be a negotiating item ever.
Mediation Hearing
Courts will often offer informal mediation where the two parties will try to work out their differences to avoid the cost of going to court. Unlike Small Claims court, mediation hearings do allow lawyers and others to be in attendance. If one does attend without a lawyer, one is at a disadvantage as any slip of the tongue will be used against you by the other side. If the other side thinks they have a strong case, then they will refuse to negotiate which increases the pressure on you to settle on their terms.
The liars:
Another issue to contend with is the fact that the other side will lie. While lying on the stand or in a prepared statement is to be expected, one will also have to contend with the fact that they will falsify documents to make the documents, like one’s medical record for instance, say what they want them to say. This is difficult for people who bring an honest complaint to the courts as proving that a particular document is fraudulent is expensive and difficult to do.
Finding a lawyer
The next problem one has is to find a lawyer. As there are many lawyers then there should be no problem, right? Not so. Because there are no lawyers in Prescott who handle cases involving bad doctors be it unprofessional behavior, negligence or outright malpractice, one is therefore forced to find one in Phoenix or Flagstaff. Most attorneys specialize in various fields of law such as wills, probate, real estate and the like. What one needs to find are lawyers that specialize in malpractice or personal injury when suing a doctor. This narrows the field quite a bit. Once you have a selection of lawyers you now need to find one who will take your case. Many won’t take a case for various reasons such as; they are too busy, you have a weak case such that they are not assured victory, you have no monetary credit and other factors. If you have legal insurance, the field is even smaller.
If you are lucky you find a lawyer that will take your case. When that happens you will be informed that you must pay a retainer of around $3,000 to $4,000, $250 per hour for doing anything such as driving to and from Phoenix and Prescott, appearing in court, or reading any documentation at $10 per page. One wonders what happens if someone cannot find a lawyer to defend them within a judicial system that is so Byzantine that it cannot be understood or properly used by the uninitiated. Fortunately, I have not experienced that, yet.
Finding people who have had experiences like yours (witnesses)
The Internet is very helpful in many ways. One can find reviews of doctors on various doctor review sites and help with finding lawyers. This can be helpful in supporting your case if you find someone who has had a similar experience as yours. The problem is that there is often no way to get in touch with them as they often use a pseudo name. On the occasion that one does find such people, they often refuse to write a statement or to testify as they don’t want to get involved.
Summary
Basically what I have described is a system that supports those with more money than you and justice is incidental, if it happens at all. One cannot get a fair hearing if the other side drives a case to a cost level where one has to bet their future and all of their savings just on a slim chance that they will prevail in court. Therefore, most will reach some kind of deal where they will agree to not criticize the doctor in a public forum and the doctor continues on a little richer because of the settlement you are forced to make which will include some form of financial “compensation.” Clearly then, the only way to successfully sue a doctor is if there is a well documented case of serious injury or death.
One solution to this kind of thing is to nationalize the legal profession and have only taxes pay for the courts for individuals, but not businesses or corporations. If this ever happens then many more justifiable cases will be brought against those who deserve it without regard to the cost. It is utopian I know so I won’t get my hopes up.
As you may have guessed, the above describes my situation at the moment. I am suing a doctor here in Prescott AZ for outrageous behavior and during the course of this process I have found all the things that I have described above.
There must be some better way to complain about doctors without such a cost burden and thus have them reviewed. Maybe the State Licensing Board? Maybe not. There are three cases against this doctor now that were ultimately closed for various reasons, but one cannot find out what their investigation revealed nor why the cases were closed nor what action was taken, if any. There is still one open case against that doctor and that is mine. I don’t expect much though.
Ultimately I am planning a website to out these doctor with lists of resources for people who have had problems such as mine. To be fair though, the plan is to let a doctor know of a complaint against them and then be given a chance to respond in their defense as some people are just vindictive and unfair.
Though things seem bleak on the lawsuit battle field at the moment, you can help. If you have had a bad experience with a doctor in Prescott let me know.
Thanks in advance
I had a recent very bad experience with a doctor in Prescott. The experience was so bad that I filed a Small Claims Court suit against him for the amount of his bill. The idea of Small Claims court is a place where the two litigants can come together and say their piece to a neutral party with no lawyers and have that 3rd party make an impartial decision. For small amounts, what could be simpler? But that is not the way it works in reality.
Because of rule A.R.S. § 22-504(A), either party can request that the case be moved to Civil Court. If one side has more money than the other side, this is what they do. This totally negates the purpose of the Small Claims Court in the majority of cases. This is particularly true when suing a doctor. It is pretty clear to me that this rule was put there by lawyers for the benefit of lawyers because once you are in the system your opponents lawyer can intimidate you to agreeing to a settlement where you pay far more than your original suit was for. This is because Civil Court is expensive and if you lose, you pay for everything, your lawyer, their lawyer, damages, court costs and witness fees and maybe even more. In addition, they will make you agree that you will make no disparaging remarks about the doctor in any venue. This trumps freedom of speech and keeps people from finding out the truth about a given doctor. This should not be allowed to be a negotiating item ever.
Mediation Hearing
Courts will often offer informal mediation where the two parties will try to work out their differences to avoid the cost of going to court. Unlike Small Claims court, mediation hearings do allow lawyers and others to be in attendance. If one does attend without a lawyer, one is at a disadvantage as any slip of the tongue will be used against you by the other side. If the other side thinks they have a strong case, then they will refuse to negotiate which increases the pressure on you to settle on their terms.
The liars:
Another issue to contend with is the fact that the other side will lie. While lying on the stand or in a prepared statement is to be expected, one will also have to contend with the fact that they will falsify documents to make the documents, like one’s medical record for instance, say what they want them to say. This is difficult for people who bring an honest complaint to the courts as proving that a particular document is fraudulent is expensive and difficult to do.
Finding a lawyer
The next problem one has is to find a lawyer. As there are many lawyers then there should be no problem, right? Not so. Because there are no lawyers in Prescott who handle cases involving bad doctors be it unprofessional behavior, negligence or outright malpractice, one is therefore forced to find one in Phoenix or Flagstaff. Most attorneys specialize in various fields of law such as wills, probate, real estate and the like. What one needs to find are lawyers that specialize in malpractice or personal injury when suing a doctor. This narrows the field quite a bit. Once you have a selection of lawyers you now need to find one who will take your case. Many won’t take a case for various reasons such as; they are too busy, you have a weak case such that they are not assured victory, you have no monetary credit and other factors. If you have legal insurance, the field is even smaller.
If you are lucky you find a lawyer that will take your case. When that happens you will be informed that you must pay a retainer of around $3,000 to $4,000, $250 per hour for doing anything such as driving to and from Phoenix and Prescott, appearing in court, or reading any documentation at $10 per page. One wonders what happens if someone cannot find a lawyer to defend them within a judicial system that is so Byzantine that it cannot be understood or properly used by the uninitiated. Fortunately, I have not experienced that, yet.
Finding people who have had experiences like yours (witnesses)
The Internet is very helpful in many ways. One can find reviews of doctors on various doctor review sites and help with finding lawyers. This can be helpful in supporting your case if you find someone who has had a similar experience as yours. The problem is that there is often no way to get in touch with them as they often use a pseudo name. On the occasion that one does find such people, they often refuse to write a statement or to testify as they don’t want to get involved.
Summary
Basically what I have described is a system that supports those with more money than you and justice is incidental, if it happens at all. One cannot get a fair hearing if the other side drives a case to a cost level where one has to bet their future and all of their savings just on a slim chance that they will prevail in court. Therefore, most will reach some kind of deal where they will agree to not criticize the doctor in a public forum and the doctor continues on a little richer because of the settlement you are forced to make which will include some form of financial “compensation.” Clearly then, the only way to successfully sue a doctor is if there is a well documented case of serious injury or death.
One solution to this kind of thing is to nationalize the legal profession and have only taxes pay for the courts for individuals, but not businesses or corporations. If this ever happens then many more justifiable cases will be brought against those who deserve it without regard to the cost. It is utopian I know so I won’t get my hopes up.
As you may have guessed, the above describes my situation at the moment. I am suing a doctor here in Prescott AZ for outrageous behavior and during the course of this process I have found all the things that I have described above.
There must be some better way to complain about doctors without such a cost burden and thus have them reviewed. Maybe the State Licensing Board? Maybe not. There are three cases against this doctor now that were ultimately closed for various reasons, but one cannot find out what their investigation revealed nor why the cases were closed nor what action was taken, if any. There is still one open case against that doctor and that is mine. I don’t expect much though.
Ultimately I am planning a website to out these doctor with lists of resources for people who have had problems such as mine. To be fair though, the plan is to let a doctor know of a complaint against them and then be given a chance to respond in their defense as some people are just vindictive and unfair.
Though things seem bleak on the lawsuit battle field at the moment, you can help. If you have had a bad experience with a doctor in Prescott let me know.
Thanks in advance
The irony is that I don't agree with governmental licensure of any profession, but I learned to have absolute contempt for our so-called legal system!
One must be careful about the web page idea. Although its emotionally satisfying, it could result in YOU being sued for defamation (which you DONT want).
There is YELP of course. I wouldn't pay the doctor. Let HIM sue for the funds, and he will turn it over to a collection agency whom you can fight and settle for a fraction of the amount I am sure.
I have to say that I get pretty nasty when people sue me like that, and I get determined that they will NEVER get what the government may try to steal from me. I am not married, so there are a lot of things I can do without upsetting close family members . Collection tends to use close family members and their influence on you to get the money they can steal from you.
No lawyer should be allowed on the Supremet Court for example federal, state, or appellates.
Their argument is it's so complex it takes a lawyer? Same they use to get elected and look at the mess that has caused.
If it's that complex who does it serve? Lawyers.
Who judges the judges? Apparently their CPAs.
.
The ability to ban disparagement, where it exists, mostly comes from contracts and mostly shows that one side had all the bargaining power. There ought to be a law voiding any such bans.
As for loser-pays (for both sides' lawyers) -- that's a wonderful rule and most countries have it, but the US mostly doesn't. Why shouldn't merit determine who pays?
My father in law and brother in law are both attorneys. Father in law is a criminal attorney, and it makes a BIG difference when he gets involved.
I had a similar, but non-medical, issue when a local propane company (Amerigas), decided that my propane tank (underground 1,500 gal) was theirs. I spoke to the prior owner and the likely (no records) plumbers who would've put in the tank. No one could produce records showing ownership. After lots of arguments and threats, Amerigas actually came to my house and disconnected my service. I filed a police report, and we drafted a letter from my father in laws office on my behalf to them. They came out on restored their sabotage, and I required they send me a letter indicating they would never reopen the issue.
Lawyers are a nuisance (apologies DB), but since they exist, a good one is really worth it. I bet a good one can scare this doctor right out of the bill. The threat is much bigger to him than just the $bill. It is also his reputation, future earnings and potentially malpractice insurance costs.
Even if they win in court, I believe the judgment has to sit for 6 months before they can levy on anything, during which you can simply file an appeal.