Do the Claims Hold Up? A Study of Medical Negligence Claims Against Neurologists

Lee D. Cranberg, Thomas H. Glick and Luke Sato

Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 2007, vol. 4, issue 1, 155-162

Abstract: We performed an in‐depth review of each of the 42 closed medical malpractice claims filed in the past 20 years against neurologist defendants covered by a common insurer. For each case, we determined whether the neurologist had rendered harmful, substandard care and noted the case outcome. In 23 of 42 claims (55 percent), there had been no harmful negligence, and payment on behalf of the neurologist occurred only once. The other 19 claims had negligent harm, but in 13 of them (68 percent) no payment was made on behalf of the negligent neurologist. In our series, the medical negligence system performed poorly, yielding a majority of inappropriate claims and no payment in a majority of appropriate claims.

Date: 2007
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00085.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:empleg:v:4:y:2007:i:1:p:155-162

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Empirical Legal Studies from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().