WhiteCoat

Nevada Supreme Court clearing malpractice backlog

According the the San Jose Mercury News, the Nevada Supreme Court is going to resolve a “backlog” of medical malpractice lawsuits by creating a “settlement marathon” next month.

In other words, the court is saying something along the lines of “Nevada hasn’t hired enough judges to deal with all of these cases, so regardless of the merit of these lawsuits, you defendants better pay the plaintiffs off now so we can get these cases off our books.”

Nice.

14 Responses to “Nevada Supreme Court clearing malpractice backlog”

  1. Matt says:

    You haven’t been involved in very many settlement conferences if you think insurers pay just because the judges order the parties to go.

  2. […] by GruntDoc on April 3rd, 2009 Nevada Supreme Court clearing malpractice backlog « WhiteCoat’s Call Room Nevada Supreme Court clearing malpractice […]

  3. ERP says:

    I wonder – how can they just do that? I bet the defendants have some recourse.

  4. Matt says:

    You’re assuming Whitecoat’s assessment of the situation is correct. Why you’re assuming that I don’t know given that he has exactly zero experience handling cases.

    A court can order the parties to a settlement conference in almost all states, and in fact in most federal courts it is required in civil cases. Doesn’t require that they settle, just that they make an attempt.

    • WhiteCoat says:

      YOU’RE assuming facts not in evidence, counselor.
      I have been to several settlement conferences. While you’re right that there is no “requirement” to settle, each time there sure are a lot of innuendos thrown about that if you proceed with the case, things won’t go your way.

  5. Matt says:

    Of course that’s what the mediator says. He reminds both sides of their risks and the weaknesses in their case. However it’s not the judge saying what you say above. That’s just silliness. Stick with medicine doc.

    • WhiteCoat says:

      #1 None of the settlement conferences I have attended involved a mediator. That’s just silliness. Article specifically states “teams of two senior judges will be assigned to conduct settlement conferences.”
      #2 Authority of Supreme Court Justices >> Authority of Mediator.
      Then again, I am just a dumb ER doc.

  6. Matt says:

    Evidently if you think a judge who is not the trial judge in a settlement inference has any more power than a mediator. Again, stick with medicine where you have a better chance of your rank speculation being right. Because you have no clue what you’re talking about here.

  7. Cat says:

    If one side got exactly what they wanted and the other side totally caved in, in what way would that be considered a settlement or mediated agreement? The defense wishes to pay $0, especially if the plaintiff has no case. There is no way to come out of a “settlement” paying $0. The only way the defense can pay zero is to go to trial and win.

    Logic says Dr. Whitecoat is right and Matt is wrong. No plaintiff is going to agree in mediation to get nothing. They would NEVER consider that a settlement. Thus, the only way to comply with the court’s orders are for the plaintiffs to be paid off. They may not get the full amount they are seeking, but they WILL get something.

  8. Matt says:

    Logic would dictate that result if you didn’t understand what the court did. They didn’t order the parties to settle, they ordered them to a settlement conference. They can’t order them to settle, but a court can order the parties to sit in the room together and discuss a resolution – which is what a settlement conference is.

    Again, federal courts and most state courts have the power to mandate a mediation or settlement conference. Doesn’t mean they can order a settlement. It would be a violation of your Constitutional rights if they prevented you from trying your case to a jury.

    Why do people rely on physician’s opinions on legal issues? Do you ask your lawyer about your knee injuries?

    • Edward G says:

      Just like some attorneys are knowledgeable about medicine, maybe some doctors are knowledgeable about law.
      You are apparently too shortsighted to realize this.

      • Matt says:

        He may well be knowledgeable about some areas. However, he’s completely wrong about this, as anyone who has ever had a court mandate such a conference knows. The court cannot ORDER you to settle a case. 7th Amendment to the Constitution and all.

  9. Anne says:

    Judge can order parties to settlment conference and party who does not settle probably will end up on the short stick. We settled (stipulated agrement approved by judge in 2006= Court Order).

    BUT case got shuffled to a different department (new judge) – and he just threw out the Court Order and granted the other party their wish WITHOUT an evidentiary hearing. The settlement conference = stipulated Court Order cancelled the evidentiary hearing in 2006.

    I have filed an appeal but don’t think I can win there either. New Judge knew he could do this (been around long time) — I need a slimey, slick attorney who is immune from censure or knows the powers on the inside —————- Anybody know such an attorney?

Leave a Reply


− three = 4

Popular Authors

  • Greg Henry
  • Rick Bukata
  • Mark Plaster
  • Kevin Klauer
  • Jesse Pines
  • David Newman
  • Rich Levitan
  • Ghazala Sharieff
  • Nicholas Genes
  • Jeannette Wolfe
  • William Sullivan
  • Michael Silverman

Subscribe to EPM