5.  A Great Trial Lawyer Maintains A Reasonable Caseload

In Part 4 we discussed the fact that great trial lawyers take time to think about their cases. And we mentioned that many lawyer argue that they don’t have time to think.

I suggest that there are only four possible reasons why lawyers don’t have time to think. First, a lawyer who doesn’t have time to think is not working hard enough. Alternatively, a lawyer who doesn’t have time to think has too much work. Third, it possible the lawyer has an appropriate caseload and is working an appropriate number of hours but is not operating efficiently. Fourth, a lawyer who doesn’t have time to think can be lazy.

The United States Court of Appeals  for the Sixth Circuit released a decision several months ago that presents a real danger for plaintiff’s lawyers and their clients who seek to rely on T.C.A. Section 20-1-119 to avoid a statute of limitations defense.

The Tennessee Bar Journal published my article on the case.  The article lays out the problems with the opinion and the case law you can use to try to convince a federal judge that the decision is plain error.

If caught in a trap, I would recommend bringing the case law I cite in the article to attention of the federal judge and asking the court to certify the question to the Tennessee Supreme Court.

The November 2007 Annals of Surgery  has an interesting article on surgical errors.  The abstract of the article says that  the authors "analyzed 444 randomly sampled surgical malpractice claims from four liability insurers. Among 258 claims in which injuries due to error were detected, 52% (n = 133) involved technical errors."

They found that "[f]orty-nine percent of the technical errors caused permanent disability; an additional 16% resulted in death. Two-thirds (65%) of the technical errors were linked to manual error, 9% to errors in judgment, and 26% to both manual and judgment error. A minority of technical errors involved advanced procedures requiring special training ("index operations"; 16%), surgeons inexperienced with the task (14%), or poorly supervised residents (9%). The majority involved experienced surgeons (73%), and occurred in routine, rather than index, operations (84%). Patient-related complexities-including emergencies, difficult or unexpected anatomy, and previous surgery-contributed to 61% of technical errors, and technology or systems failures contributed to 21%."

So, what do they conclude?  "Most technical errors occur in routine operations with experienced surgeons, under conditions of increased patient complexity or systems failure. Commonly recommended interventions, including restricting high-complexity operations to experienced surgeons, additional training for inexperienced surgeons, and stricter supervision of trainees, are likely to address only a minority of technical errors. Surgical safety research should instead focus on improving decision-making and performance in routine operations for complex patients and circumstances."

We are hearing it again this year:  doctors are leaving the state because we don’t have caps on damages in medical malpractice cases.  When pressed for evidence on this point,  a doctor will refer to "some guy in Memphis" or "some woman in Knoxville" who quit practicing medicine because of the risk of being sued.

Set aside the fact that the risk of being sued exists whether there are damage caps or not.  Are doctors leaving the state?

Well, consider this.  In 1975, at the time of the first medical malpractice crisis, Tennessee had 11.3 doctors of medicine in patient care for every 10,000 residents.

The Eastern Section of our Court of Appeals has ruled that Rule 5A(4)(c) of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure means what it says and that a party cannot fax file an affidavit opposing a motion for summary judgment .

Rule 5A (4)(c) says that “The following documents shall not be filed in the trial court by facsimile transmission: . . . (c) A will or codicil to a will; a bond; or any pleading or document requiring an official seal . . . .”     Affidavits require a seal.

A technicality?  Certainly.  The rule?  Certainly.  Are you ever going to take the chance of filing an affidavit by fax just to argue to the Tennessee Supreme Court that a trial judge should not follow the rule?  Nope.

Day on Torts:  A Handbook for Tennessee Tort Lawyers 2008 has been updated to include all cases through Sunday, January 13, 2008.

The updates work like this.  After you have found the leading case summarized in one of 233 sections of the book, go to the "Free Updates" page of the book website, scroll down to the relevant section, and you will any decision released since October 1, 2007 on that subject.

Don’t have the book?  Well, my bias is obvious, but I must say I have been very gratified by the comments I have received to date.  I have had multiple people tell me they use it every day.  I was in three different law offices the other day and saw the book open on lawyer’s desk.  Last week one purchaser placed a second order for the rest of the lawyers in his office.  Even judges have begun ordering it.

Yesterday I wrote about tort statistics revealed by the 2006-07 "Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary."  Among the statistics I cited was that there were 584 medical malpractices cases filed in the state of Tennessee and a total of 15 medical malpractice trials.

To put that in perspective, remember that according to the National Institute of Health 98,000 people a year die in the United States from malpractice in hospitals alone.  Assuming that Tennessee is neither worse nor better than average, that means that 1986 Tennesseans die each year as a result of malpractice in a hospital setting (because we have about 2% of the nation’s population).

And yet only 584 malpractice cases were filed in the entire state for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007.  Those cases presumably involved not only deaths in hospitals but also injuries in hospitals and deaths and injuries in outpatient settings, nursing homes and surgery centers.  They also include cases against pharmacies and home health agencies and outpatient physical therapy centers.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has just released the 2006-07 “Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary.” It has some amazing, indeed alarming, information.

  • There were 584 medical malpractice cases filed in Tennessee last year. To put that in perspective, there were 10,165 general “Damages/Torts” cases filed. Indeed, there were less medical malpractice cases filed than there were kidnapping (660) and homicide (1622) cases.
  • There were 28 jury trials in Chancery Court and 393 civil jury trials in Circuit Court in the entire state.
  • There were just 590 jury and non-jury personal injury and death cases tried in the entire state; 289 of those were jury trials. In 242 jury and non-jury cases the plaintiffs recovered money (about 40%).
  • Davidson County had 54 of the jury trials; Shelby County had 31. Knox Courty had 45 jury trials of personal injury and wrongful death cases, Hamilton County had 23 and Montgomery County had 6. Forty-three counties had no personal injury or wrongful death jury trials.
  • There were only 15 medical malpractice trials in the entire state during the one year period covered by the report. ]
  • About 5% of all personal injury and tort cases end up going to trial (jury or non-jury).
  • Total damages awarded ($44,600,000) in personal injury and death cases is down from $94,500,000 a year previously.
  • The total number of tort cases filed has dropped in the last ten years.
  • This data is for the one year  period ending June 30, 2007.

Read the statistical section of the Annual Report here.

I will have some comments about  this data in later posts.

Contact Information