Expert witness testimony in medical malpractice litigation: Minutiae and methods – In credence and credibility

Abstract

Most medical cases have favorable health outcomes. There are, however, some cases that do not culminate in the most favorable ones. In the latter instance, situations may even escalate to the point of a medical malpractice lawsuit against the medically abiding physician or surgeon. Given the above scenario, the present review offers accessible information regarding the minutiae of expert witnesses and entailing testimonies. This paper describes the intricacies of expert testimonies, presents a scenario that makes these testimonies double-edged instruments, and scrutinizes two legal records as consequential options to consider. In our first research statement, we zoom into the eligibility of expert witnesses and intricacies of its processes. We, thereafter, present a reasonable grasp of the contents and characteristics of these testimonies. In our second research statement, we propose a strategy to safeguard the defendant clinician's stance in expert testimonies that may present as double-edged instruments. In our third research statement, we weigh the pros and cons of two legal records such as a Memorandum of Settlement and a Consent Terms document. The present research is designed to explore details about expert testimonies in malpractice cases. A strategy to protect the defendant's actions would be to request the testimony in confidence as a proactive measure to prevent the case from being abruptly withdrawn. A Consent Terms document would be more preferable to a Memorandum of Settlement because this document hinders further escalation into appellant courts in a legal landscape.