1 The Adverse Direct Examination of a Defendant Doctor in a Medical Malpractice Case By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan There is no better way to prove medical malpractice than through the mouths of the defendant physicians themselves. Although they may never specifically admit that they departed from accepted standards of medical practice, a skillfully pointed adverse direct examination can leave no doubt as to their culpability. Although it does take some courage to begin a case with an adverse witness, it is almost always the best way to proceed for any number of reasons. First, it is very dramatic. Second, because you can lead the doctor as an adverse party, you are controlling precisely the content and tempo of his testimony 1. Next, you can teach the jury the anatomy, medicine and standards of care through the very person who injured your client and violated those very standards. Finally, by having the defendants testify prior to your expert, the defense cannot put a spin on the defendants testimony to rebut your expert s opinion on the facts, issues and medical departures. Because you are going to make your case through a witness who wants to do nothing less than destroy it, you must be in total control of the examination, from beginning to end. Needless to say, to exercise total control, every question has to be a leading question. A leading question, of course, is one which suggests the answer, contains within it the answer, or calls for a yes or no answer. When dealing with an 1The right to ask leading questions of an adverse witness on direct examination is well established: An adverse witness may be cross-examined, and leading questions may be put to him by the party calling him, for the very sensible and sufficient reason that he is adverse and that the danger arising from such a mode of examination by a party calling a friendly or unbiased witness does not exist Becker v. Koch, 104 N.Y. 394 (1887).
2 adverse physician, however, it is best to always suggest the answer, and ask for the witness assent. Let s take a simple fact pattern where a young woman gets paralyzed during an epidural steroid injection in her neck. The case is brought against the neuroradiologist for wrongly diagnosing a herniated disc rather than a discitis or infection of the disc or spine, the treating neurosurgeon for missing the signs of the infection and misreading the MRI studies as well, and the pain management physician who paralyzed the client with his injection: Q: Dr. McCann, in the past, you have actually treated Valerie Smith, correct? Q: You were her neurosurgeon, true? Q: You treated her long before March 29 th of 2006, true? Q: But on March 29 th, 2006, you had to operate on her, correct? Q: And that was because, after an epidural injection in her neck, she couldn t move her arms or legs, true? Q: And you came to an opinion, first of all, that she was paralyzed, true? Q: And that she was now a quadriplegic, right? Q: And you also came to the opinion, at that very time of the surgery, that it was the epidural injection administered an hour before your surgery that caused her paralysis, true? If the witness is inconsistent or uncooperative, use your impeachment materials: medical reports, office charts and deposition transcripts. So, assuming the doctor is inconsistent with his prior testimony, impeach him with his deposition transcript: Q. Prior to surgery, you came to an opinion that it was the epidural steroid injection that caused the quadriplegia in Valerie Smith, true?
3 A: True. Q: No question about that, correct? A: Correct. Q: And that opinion, before the surgery, was based upon looking at the MRI s of her cervical spine, true? A: True. Q: And nothing that you saw in surgery changed your opinion that it was the epidural steroid injection that caused her paralysis, true? A: Not true. And it is not that simple. Q: But, Sir, you thought it was that simple on June 21, 2007, correct? Q: That is when you previously testified in this case, right? Q: At what is known as a deposition, true? Q: At that time, you were with your lawyer, true? Q: You raised your right hand, and swore that the testimony you were about to give was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, true? Q: And your testimony was truthful, wasn t it? Q: And you were asked the following questions, and gave the following answers, page 29, line 2: Question, Prior to the surgery, did you have an opinion as to the cause of the paralysis? Answer, Yes, the epidural steroid injection. Question, After the surgery, did your opinion change? Answer, no. Next question, Question So your opinion was, both before and after surgery that the cause of the paralysis was the epidural steroid injection? Answer, Yes. Q: You were asked those questions sir, under oath? Q: You gave those answers, true?
4 Q: You d agree that they were different than your answers today? Q: Correct me if I m wrong sir, but prior to testifying and I m not going to ask you what you spoke about but you did speak to your lawyer, true? Q: And it was after that time, that your answers changed?. Be careful when using a deposition to impeach the adverse physician. Do not impeach on an unimportant point; do not impeach unless the inconsistency is clear; and do not impeach without specific reference to the page numbers, line numbers, date and place of the deposition, by reading the transcript verbatim beginning each question by actually saying Question, and each answer by actually saying Answer. Otherwise, you will draw a valid objection from your adversary (or interruption from the court reporter) which will interfere with the flow of your examination. Even when defendants share a unified defense, when the medicine is on your side, you can use leading questions to enhance the claim against a co-defendant. For example, if you want the operating surgeon who reviewed the pre-surgical MRI s to implicate the doctor who performed the injection, you can go after him this way: 2 Q: Sir, prior to the surgery, you reviewed the MRI films, true? Q: You did that with the radiologist in real time, sitting at the computer? true? Q: Not only that, the radiologist rendered a report of his reading of the MRI, 2Carvalho v. New Rochelle Hosp., 53 A.D.2d 635 (2d Dept. 1976) and its progeny, which stand for the proposition that defendants may not be required to opine about the care rendered by a co-defendant at deposition, have been held inapplicable at trial (see Giventer v. Rementeria, 181 Misc.2d 582). The rationale is clear: the purpose of Carvalho is to prevent plaintiffs from suing doctors merely to obtain a free expert opinion against a co-defendant at deposition. This danger disappears at trial, and should not serve to impair the rules of evidence which permit broad and probing cross-examination of a defendant.
5 Q: And that MRI, which is part of the hospital record in evidence said as follows: There is subarachnoid air consistent with air piercing the cord, true? Q: And that means air from the needle got into the meninges, or one of the three layers of the outside of the spinal cord, true? Q: No question about that, right? Q: So that the needle wielded by Dr. Riser - your co-defendant, put air right into the subarachnoid space, true? Q: And it was at that very time, Valerie became paralyzed, right? Needless to say, surgeons try to avoid opining on MRI s and CT scans in court as being outside of their expertise. However, this position is a silly one in light of the fact that they constantly read these films in practice before, during and after surgery. Instead of letting the clinician say he is not a board certified radiologist and therefore uncomfortable giving an expert opinion on them in court, make him first admit that he is, in fact, qualified to read them. Here, the set-up becomes just as important is the substantive cross-examination. Establish that there is not a spinal surgeon in the world who would perform surgery on a patient without looking at the actual scans. And lay a foundation for the clinician s expertise in reviewing films: Q: Sir, you are a board certified neurosurgeon, true? Q: You were boarded over ten years ago, right? Q: And you have been operating on spines for many years, haven t you? Q: And certainly prior to deciding whether a patient needs spinal surgery, you refer the patient for an MRI, true?
6 Q: In the old days, the radiologist would write a report and send it back to you with the actual films, correct? Q: Films that you would personally review, right? Q: You would read the report and look at the actual films, true? Q: Now you can access your radiologist s pac system and review the films and the report remotely, correct? Q: Because before you open up a patient s spine, you want to see the pathology for yourself, correct? Q: And even though you are not a neuroradiologist, or even a radiologist, you review the actual films before operating, don t you? Q: As a matter of fact, that is the standard of care for a spinal surgeon, true? Q: In fact, you would never operate or even decide to operate without looking at the films first, true? Q: It would be wrong to do that, wouldn t it? Q: It would be below the standard of care for a clinician to do surgery of the spine without first looking at the actual MRI films, right? Q: Sir, you ve done thousand of surgeries, true? Q: And it would be safe to say that before each of those surgeries you looked at the actual films, true? Q: Not only that, you put the films up on your light box and showed my client specifically where you believed the pathology was, didn t you? Q: When you did that you didn t offer the patient a disclaimer, did you? Q: And you didn t say to her, I m not a board certified radiologist, so disregard what I m telling you is on these films, did you? Now confront him with the actual films and establish that he misread them and therefore directed the wrong treatment for the patient:
7 Q: Doctor, I m showing you what are known as sagittal images of the cervical spine, correct? Q: By sagittal, we mean lateral or side images, true? Q: With cuts starting on the outer edge of the body coming into the midline of the spinal column, then back out to the outer edge of the body, right? Q: And you diagnosed an acute herniated disc at C5-C6, true? right? Q: But you d agree sir that Valerie was 60 years old at the time of this scan, Q: And these are T2 weighted images, aren t they? Q: Which means that things with high-water content like cerebrospinal fluid and healthy disc material should be bright in color, or white, or high in signal or hyperintense, true? Q: Yet her discs at C3-C4, C4-C5 and C6-C7 are hypo-intense, true? Q: Meaning low in signal, right? Q: Or dark in color right? Q Which is not surprising in a 60-year-old woman, true? Q: That darkness is from what is known as dessication, or dehydration or loss of water, correct? Q: Because as we age, our discs dehydrate or lose water, don t they? Q: Yet the disc that is causing her pain is bright in signal true? Q: It is white in color, correct? Q: It lights up, doesn t it? Q: Doctor, you would expect someone with a long history of degenerative disc disease like Valerie has to have a dark, degenerated, dessicated, dehydrated disc, wouldn t you?
8 Q: Yet this disc is white, bright and hyper-intense, isn t it? Q: Because it does have fluid content, right? Q: But not water, true? Q: Because every other disc is dessicated due to drying up from aging, right? Q: That fluid is pus, isn t it? Q: From an infected disc, true? Q: And you now know that because you operated on her, removed the disc, sent it to pathology and determined it was, in fact, pus, true? Q: And you would agree with me that an epidural steroid injection is contraindicated in the face of an infection, isn t it? Q: Yet you sent my client for that steroid injection, didn t you? Q: The injection that rendered her paralyzed, true? To make a prima facie case of medical malpractice, you need expert testimony outlining the departures from accepted standards of medical practice with causation of injury. To win the case, however, you have to beat the defendant doctors on their own turf. Rather than waiting for your adversary s case to confront the defendant doctors on cross-examination where your adversary can put forward his client in the best light and then tailor the testimony to fall outside of your expert s opinion it is far better to call the defendants and prove your case through them. Then, by the time your expert testifies, the jury already knows the medicine, the standard of care and the departures. With a thorough knowledge of the medicine and radiological studies, and total control of the witnesses through the use of leading questions and impeachment materials, a decisive victory awaits.
9 Ben Rubinowitz is a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman, Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz. He also is an Adjunct Professor of Law teaching trial practice at Hofstra University School of Law and Cardozo Law School. GairGair.com; Evan Torgan is a member of the firm Torgan & Cooper, P.C. TorganCooper.com; Richard Steigman, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman, Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz, assisted in the preparation of this article.
CROSS EXAMINATION DEALING WITH CHANGING TESTIMONY: FROM SET UP TO KNOCK DOWN By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan Quite often at trial, a witness or a party to an action will offer a different response to
EXPOSING AN EXPERT WITNESS BIAS DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION: COLLATERAL ATTACK By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan When preparing for a cross-examination, the skilled litigator must always first determine his
Trying a Labor Law Case with a Sole Proximate Cause Defense By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan Although Labor Law Section 240 was designed to protect workers, making owners and general contractors strictly
Attacking the Electronic Medical Record By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan The electronic age has paved the way for speedy retrieval of medical records. It has allowed for instantaneous access to records
Page 1 of 7 Ben Brodhead on proving causation and damages in spinal fusion cases. Friend on Facebook Follow on Twitter Forward to a Friend Proving Causation and Damages in Spinal Fusion Cases By: Ben C.
New York Law Journal Friday, January 6, 2006 HEADLINE: BYLINE: Trial Advocacy, Impeachment With a Prior Inconsistent Statement Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan BODY: One of the most exhilarating parts
New York Law Journal Wednesday, July 31, 2002 HEADLINE: BYLINE: Trial Advocacy, Cross-Examination: The Basics Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan BODY: Cross-examination involves relatively straightforward
The Trial of a Soft Tissue Knee Injury Case By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan Although often overlooked as commonplace or insignificant, an injury to the knee joint often results in a severe, permanent
Impeaching the Spine Injury Medical Expert By Ernest P. Chiodo, M.D., J.D., M.P.H., M.S., M.B.A., C.I.H. Physician-Attorney-Biomedical Engineer It is a common error that an attorney retains the wrong type
Videotaping IMEs: a Corollary to Defense Surveillance By: Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan In personal injury cases, the defense bar has long employed the use of covert video surveillance of plaintiffs engaged
New York Law Journal Tuesday, November 28, 2000 HEADLINE: BYLINE: Trial Advocacy, Direct Examination Of A Medical Expert Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan BODY: The direct examination of your medical expert
Trying Damages in the Wrongful Death Case of an Adult Child By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan When a young worker, who is married, with three children and who is earning $100,000 per year, dies after falling
Dealing With Weaknesses and Maintaining Credibility By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan While many trial lawyers focus on the credibility of their witnesses, a truism remains: No one s credibility is more
New York Law Journal Tuesday, July 31, 2001 HEADLINE: BYLINE: Trial Advocacy, Cross-Exam Of Vocational Rehabilitation Experts Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan BODY: Historically, damages relating to loss
Aggrava&on of a Pre Exis&ng Medical Condi&on Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan New York Law Journal 04 23 2012 Familiar to most tort cases are standard defense themes that must be squarely addressed by the
From Opening to Summation, Making First Impressions Count By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan There is an old adage that every trial lawyer should accept as gospel: "You don't get a second chance to make
Scaled Questions During Jury Selection By: Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan One of the most crucial tasks a trial attorney must undertake is selecting a pool of jurors that will view her client's case in
Trying a Wrongful Death Case: Voir Dire as a Bridge to Summation By: Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan Damages in a wrongful death case are fraught with complex issues and legal challenges. While it is easy
May, 2011 FRCP and Physician Testimony: Treating Physicians, Experts, and Hybrid Witnesses The US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, rules on these matters in the case of Goodman v. Staples the Office Superstore,
Oratory Techniques for Effective Opening Statements and Summations Ben Rubinowitz And Evan Torgan Without question, the ultimate goal of every trial lawyer is to win. To accomplish this goal, the lawyer
Friday, August 29, 2008 TRIAL ADVOCACY The Art of Jury Selection: Working With Challenges Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan It has been said that the purpose of jury selection is to select a 'fair and impartial'
Malpractice and the Infectious Disease Any Physician WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW! G.R. Donowitz 2015 Why this talk? Why me? Expert witness for a long time Defense and Plaintiff work Have said, No, no case and
JUROR S MANUAL (Prepared by the State Bar of Michigan) Your Role as a Juror You ve heard the term jury of one s peers. In our country the job of determining the facts and reaching a just decision rests,
In the matter of STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, LABOR & ECONOMIC GROWTH OFFICE OF FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE REGULATION Before the Commissioner of Financial and Insurance Regulation XXXXX Petitioner
Medical Malpractice: What You Don t Know Can Hurt You O. William Brown, MD, JD Chief, Division of Vascular Surgery William Beaumont Hospital Interim Chief, Division of Vascular Surgery Wayne State University
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
The Malpractice Lawsuit: Process and Prevention Advocate Health Care 7 th Annual Advocate Trauma Symposium Wyndham Lisle - Chicago November 18, 2010 Rogelio Lasso The John Marshall Law School BACKGROUND
ROLES TO ASSIGN 1. Judge 2. Courtroom Deputy 3. Prosecutor 1 opening statement 4. Prosecutor 2 direct of Dana Capro 5. Prosecutor 3 direct of Jamie Medina 6. Prosecutor 4 cross of Pat Morton 7. Prosecutor
79 Wall Street Huntington, NY 11743 800.660.1466 631.425.9775 718.220.0099 631.415.5004 (fax) A Consumer Guide What is a Deposition and How Does It Work in a Personal Injury Case? A key component in many
VETTING THE EXPERT---YOURS AND THEIRS Too often an attorney will retain an expert on the advice of another attorney or based on a limited amount of time spent searching for the expert. The most important
Herniated Cervical Disc North American Spine Society Public Education Series What Is a Herniated Disc? The backbone, or spine, is composed of a series of connected bones called vertebrae. The vertebrae
Medical Malpractice VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS INTRODUCTION: Tell the jurors that this is a very big and a very important case. Do a SHORT summary of the case and the damages we are seeking. This summary should
If you or a loved one have suffered because of a negligent error during spinal surgery, you will be going through a difficult time. You may be worried about your future, both in respect of finances and
CASE INFORMATION SHEET FLORIDA LEGAL PERIODICALS, INC. P.O. Box 3730, Tallahassee, FL 32315-3730 (904) 224-6649 / (800) 446-2998 * FAX (850) 222-6266 COUNTY and COURT: Pinellas County Circuit Court NAME
Prevalence of annular tears and disc herniations on MR images of the cervical spine in symptom free volunteers 1 European Journal of Radiology September 2005, 55, 409 414 C.W. Ernst, T.W. Stadnik, E. Peeters,
Report #9 Human Anatomy and Soft Tissue Injuries: The most common injury occurs from the bouncing around of a body in a vehicle. Often, a car occupant s neck whips back and forth, giving rise to what is
Temple Physical Therapy A General Overview of Common Neck Injuries For current information on Temple Physical Therapy related news and for a healthy and safe return to work, sport and recreation Like Us
THE IMPORTANCE OF COMPREHENSIVE NOTES AND RECORDS by: Ryan A. Murray, Oatley Vigmond Personal Injury Lawyers LLP Introduction Comprehensive clinical notes and records are an important part of patient care.
. Page 0 Table of Contents Introductory Letter From Guy... 2 Number 1: How Much Experience Does The Doctor Have?... 3 Number 2: Do They Have A Strong Team Behind Them?... 4 Number 3: Do They Offer An All-In-One
1 Key Medical Evidence Used to Win Personal Injury Cases Brought to you by the attorneys at Shapiro, Cooper, Lewis & Appleton, P.C. Overview An injury inflicted at work, at school, while shopping, or elsewhere
Life as a Medical Malpractice Attorney A medical malpractice case lands on your desk. What is your first thought? What is your plan? If you re stumped or not sure where to begin, studying the anatomy of
The following is a sampling of products offered by Zimmer Spine for use in Anterior Cervical Fusion procedures. Patient Guide to Neck Surgery Anterior Cervical Fusion Trinica Select With the Trinica and
THE DEFENSE LAWYER S TOOL KIT FOR WORKING WITH MEDICAL EXPERTS ABA Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section Medicine and Law Committee Annual Meeting August 1, 2009 Jessie L. Harris Williams Kastner 601
IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION THIS OPINION IS DESIGNATED "NOT TO BE PUBLISHED." PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT, CR 76.28(4)(C), THIS OPINION IS
BETRICE ROBINSON, PLINTIFF, 2003 CO #177 S T T E O F M I C H I G N WORKER'S COMPENSTION PPELLTE COMMISSION V DOCKET # 02-0371 MGM GRND DETROIT, L.L.C., SELF INSURED, DEFENDNT. PPEL FROM MGISTRTE BRNEY.
The Defense Lawyer s Tool Kit For Working With Medical Experts Jessie L. Harris You may have to play catch-up, but you can play it to win. Jessie L. Harris is a trial lawyer and Member in the Seattle office
- Cutting Edge DUI Defense At A Price You Can Afford - Not Guilty Dismissed Reduced The Exact Same Science That Got You Arrested For DUI Can Be What Gets You Off. The Decision You Make Right Now Will Affect
DENNIS A. PALSO workers compensation board certified DENNIS A. PALSO, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW Gateway Pines Executive Park 710-94 th Avenue North Suite 309 St. Petersburg, Florida 33702 Telephone (727) 578-5911
Chapter 4 Legal Ethics Yes. You read that right legal ethics. Har de har. Go ahead. Get it out of your system. How about this one? Why do scientists prefer using lawyers over lab rats? There are some things
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION TWO KATHY WACKER and BRYAN No. ED99789 WACKER, Appeal from the Circuit Court Appellants, of Cape Girardeau County vs. Hon. William L. Syler ST.
DATE: / / HG SY EH CQ RL AS JZ Name: (Last, First, M.I.) M F DOB: / / Decision Point LOW BACK PAIN: SHOULD I HAVE AN MRI? You may want to have a say in this decision, or you may simply want to follow your
The Petrylaw Lawsuits Settlements and Injury Settlement Report BACK INJURIES How Minnesota Juries Decide the Value of Pain and Suffering in Back Injury Cases The Petrylaw Lawsuits Settlements and Injury
PRODUCT LIABILITY Product Liability Litigation The Effect of Product Safety Regulatory Compliance By Kenneth Ross Product liability litigation and product safety regulatory activities in the U.S. and elsewhere
IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion) KIRCHER V. THE MASCHHOFFS, LLC NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION AND MAY
7.9. The likely running order Assuming both parties are going to give evidence, the trial is likely to proceed along the following lines: claimant opens and gives their evidence claimant s witnesses give
Do you have Back Pain? Associated with: Herniated Discs? Protruding Discs? Degenerative Disk Disease? Posterior Facet Syndrome? Sciatica? You may be a candidate for Decompression Therapy The Dynatronics
EVALUATING THE LOW IMPACT AUTO CASE Dana G. Taunton BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C. Montgomery, Alabama 36104 I. INTRODUCTION Low impact auto cases may be simple or complex. A simple
PEOPLE V. HARRY POTTER THE COURT: Members of the jury, the defendant, Harry Potter, is charged in a one-count information which reads as follows: On or about November 23, 2008, HARRY POTTER, did unlawfully
New York Law Journal Monday, October 29, 2001 HEADLINE: BYLINE: Trial Advocacy, The Tale Of The Tape: Dealing With Video Surveillance Of Your Client Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan BODY: One of the most
CIVIL MOCK TRIAL IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN DONALD BRASHEAR PLAINTIFF AND MARTY MCSORLEY DEFENDANT (Issue: Is Marty McSorley liable for personally injuring Donald Brashear?) Order
DEPOSITION LETTER Dear Client: The attorney for the defendant has requested your deposition as part of the discovery which you must provide in your lawsuit. A deposition is the defense attorneys' opportunity
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF LAW LEGAL METHOD-CIVIL PROCEDURE (3 Hours) Day Division Wednesday, December 18, 1991 Professor Condlin - Section B 9:10 a.m. - 12:10 p.m. No. Signature: Printed Name: INSTRUCTIONS:
PAGE 1 OF 5 1 (Use for claims arising on or after 1 October 2011.) The (state number) issue reads: Was the plaintiff [injured] [damaged] by the defendant s negligent performance of (corporate) (administrative)
When it comes to proving violations of the safety rules and the resulting harm to nursing home residents, you need to know the right questions to ask the defense witnesses, as well as how to dissect common
A Patient s Guide to Artificial Cervical Disc Replacement Each year, hundreds of thousands of adults are diagnosed with Cervical Disc Degeneration, an upper spine condition that can cause pain and numbness
The following is a sampling of products offered by Zimmer Spine for use in Open Lumbar Fusion procedures. Patient Guide to Lower Back Surgery Open Lumbar Fusion Dynesys The Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization
Sequence of Evidence and Witnesses in a Traumatic Brain Injury Case Sequence of Evidence and Witnesses in a Traumatic Brain Injury Case Who's on First? Princeton, New Jersey Trial Diplomacy Journal, Vol.
Spinal Injections North American Spine Society Public Education Series What Is a Spinal Injection? Your doctor has suggested that you have a spinal injection to help reduce pain and improve function. This
The DelliCarpini Law Firm Melville Law Center 877.917.9560 225 Old Country Road fax 631.923.1079 Melville, NY 11747 www.dellicarpinilaw.com John M. DelliCarpini Christopher J. DelliCarpini (admitted in
Spinal Pain: Diagnosis and Interventional Procedures Dr Ilias Drivas MBBS FRANZCR Diagnostic and Interventional Radiologist Alfred Imaging Group Staff Specialist Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Overview Go
All About Herniated Discs Anatomy & Pathology Conflict of Interest Disclosure DR. HABER CERTIFIES THAT, TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE, NO AFFILIATION OR RELATIONSHIP OF A FINANCIAL NATURE WITH A COMMERCIAL
SPINAL STENOSIS Information for Patients WHAT IS SPINAL STENOSIS? The spinal canal is best imagined as a bony tube through which nerve fibres pass. The tube is interrupted between each pair of adjacent
I. ROBINSON V.BATES, 112 Ohio St.3d 17, 2006 Ohio 6362 (December 20, 2006). A. Landlord-tenant case In Hamilton County, Ohio, Plaintiff tenant sued her landlord for personal injuries caused when she broke
CHAPTER 24 DEPOSITION GUIDANCE FOR NURSES I. INTRODUCTION With the number of personal injury and healthcare-related lawsuits increasing each year, at some time in your professional career as a nurse, you
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Advanced Dermatology Associates : (Selective Insurance Company of : America), : Petitioners : : v. : No. 2186 C.D. 2014 : Submitted: May 22, 2015 Workers Compensation
RECENT MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CASES By Judge Bryan C. Dixon 1. MERE TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH TREATING DOCTOR DOES NOT ESTABLISH DUTY TO PATIENT Jennings v. Badgett, 2010 OK 7 Facts: Plaintiffs are parents
FEATURE ARTICLE Evidence of Prior Injury Admissibility of Evidence of Prior Injury Under the Same Part of the Body Rule By: Timothy J. Harris Broderick, Steiger, Maisel & Zupancic, Chicago I. Introduction
Get Back to the Life You Love! The MedStar Spine Center in Chevy Chase The MedStar Spine Center in Chevy Chase Relief from Pain, Restoration of Function Non-surgical, Minimally Invasive and Complex Surgical
SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND REGULATION DIVISION OF LABOR AND MANAGEMENT CAMERON SMITH, HF No. 28, 2010/11 Claimant, v. DECISION STAN HOUSTON EQUIPTMENT CO., Employer, and UNITED FIRE & CASUALTY