My question involves medical malpractice in the state of: CA
My question is, where/how can a member of the public review court files
for all prior unpublished cases involving a litigant's defendants ?
I believe that one of the plaintiff's handicaps in med/mal
litigation is based on the fact that it is near impossible to research
whether the medical defendants had been sued for a similar injury or
For example, this institution [which will be nameless] has a minimum
of 50 lawsuits on file at any given time. However, I have only found
2 or 3 on the court websites, that have been published.
This appears to defy common sense.
They either won, lost or settled a percentage of the cases.
i.e. This dr. has been sued for the same misconduct in the past- and judgment was against him/her but it is unpublished.
I realize the prior lawsuits cannot be used as evidence, but it would certainly provide insight as to a doctor's or hospital's defense strategy under similar circumstances and if that defendant had a judgment against him/her.
It's a no-brainer that the medical community is not anxious to provide the patient population with this type of information but in my opinion it is unfair. Suppose I want to consider a certain procedure at a certain hospital by a certain dr. - why shouldn't I have the privilege of researching or reviewing unpublished decisions regarding these parties prior to my decision to use their services.
How would we ever know that another person [or persons] had been injured by the same dr. at the same hospital??
Isn't it a likely litigant's argument - that had the unpublished case information about this dr. or hospital been available, no consent would have been given, and an adverse medical even may not have occured?
Appreciate comments on this.