I sat in a settlement conference the other day with a district court judge. My clients are three young girls who lost their father after he was prematurely discharged from the hospital with a dangerous cardiac condition and died shortly thereafter. The defendant cardiologist, concerned with his reputation and honor, was upset that he had been sued. The implication was that lawyers (me, in particular), and the legal system, were the source of his problems.
I hear this sort of thing every now and then and I’m always amazed. After all, in Nevada, lawyers don’t sue doctors – doctors sue doctors.
Nevada law requires that every plaintiff obtain a medical review from a qualified specialist prior to filing a malpractice complaint. All malpractice complaints must be filed with an appropriate expert affidavit.
In the case at hand, a highly qualified well-credentialed cardiologist opined that the defendant cardiologist was negligent and should have taken corrective action. Our case would not have been filed but for the opinion of another cardiologist.
Medical malpractice lawsuits in Nevada would not exist but for doctors who testify against other doctors.
Steve is the Managing Shareholder of Steven J. Klearman & Associates, a civil litigation law firm located in Reno, Nevada. He practices primarily in the areas of civil litigation and injury law, and has authored one of the definitive guides to Nevada civil law that is widely used by Nevada judges and attorneys, his book entitled Elements of Nevada Legal Theories.