Complications from Surgical Malpractice: Court or Settlement?

The decision on whether to settle or go to court as part of litigating a surgical malpractice claim is a highly case-specific decision, most likely best made with the insight and guidance of a medical malpractice lawyer. The following article outlines the potential reasons a given patient may elect to settle versus deciding to go to court. It is important for any patient to understand that his or her individual case may involve facts and other elements that may indicate making one decision or the other, and in turn, only a practicing medical malpractice lawyer can accurately inform a patient of his or her best legal interests.

Settlement in Surgical Malpractice Cases

More often than not, a patient having filed a viable medical malpractice claim as the result of surgical malpractice will receive some form of settlement offer. The decision to settle carries some significant legal implications. First, any settlement agreement often relieves the parties involved from any further liability following the payment of a settlement amount. For a patient, this means that no more compensation or other claims can be made concerning a given surgical malpractice incident and the ensuing injuries, losses, damages, and other harm.

On the other hand, if a settlement award accounts for and adequately compensates a patient for losses and other damages, both current and future, accepting the settlement offer may be a wise decision. Unfortunately, the costs and other problems relating to surgical malpractice often place patients in personal financial bind. This may ultimately provide impetus for accepting a settlement offer. Again, this is a highly personal and individual consideration, but nonetheless, very relevant. Furthermore, litigating claims can prove taxing, both financially, physically, and mentally. This must be taken into consideration, or at the very least, will become a consideration the longer litigation continues.

Another reason a patient may elect to settle stems from the viability, or relative strength, of the claim itself. Certain claims may not preserve in court, and in turn, a patient is never guaranteed a favorable award in the courts. This especially true in cases involving comparative or contributory negligence. A patient may elect to take guaranteed compensation in lieu of undetermined compensation at a later date, which may potentially be locked in an appeals process indefinitely.

Going to Court in Surgical Malpractice Cases

The most notable reason to go to court in surgical malpractice cases is when the liable party refuses to make a settlement offer. Much like patients are not guaranteed a favorable outcome in the courts, a patient is also never guaranteed to receive a settlement offer, let alone one that reasonably fits their demands for compensation.

One of the notable aspects of going to trial in lieu of accepting a settlement offer often revolves around settlement offers that do not adequately compensate a patient for his or her losses, both current and future. Furthermore, cases involving the potential for punitive damages can fare well in the courts, and most likely will receive limited offers covering punitive damage compensation in a settlement offer.

Getting Legal Help with Deciding Whether to Go to Trial or Settle

In short, the highly case-specific nature of each medical malpractice claims case, in light of the personal considerations relevant to each patient, will require a patient to seek outside legal counsel and representation during the process of litigating a surgical malpractice case.