1. if Plaintiffs showed several Medical study datum regarding about the case on the defendant's misdiagnosis / delay diagnosis of Cancer and potential wrong diagnosis based on the last genetic molecular test took.
2. Pointed out the standard care did not meet based on their published guidelines or the heatlh care standard guidelines either.
3. Pointed out the trend of Kaiser doctors often mis-reading the X-ray, Ct-scan, Biopsy tests, 4 ER discharges within 14 months complaints
Saw similiar cases, CCP 437c, CA2d 441, Taliaferro vs Coakley, 186 CA2d 258; Dryer vs Dryer, 231. My question is can the defense use msj to against the plaintiffs even in Kaiser Arbitration not trials and how to refute it properly? Thank you.
Medical doctors can use the same well-published medical study data to back up their beliefs - some of those published papers even came from renowned specialized doctors, so why can't plaintiffs presented it without doctors and without being msj'ed? We also have biotech background on Cancer- we make cancer test strip and vaccines RD work. CA Arbitration no Trial in Court. Attorney without Medical background would not able to help the case either. We hired attorneys for patents & IPO and never work out for us. Hired & Fired attorneys and doing this self since Jan as they only wanted to get paid for doing no work.
Criminal Defense Attorney
Mediacal malpractice is a speciality of personal injury. It absolutely requires the use of experts on both sides of the dispute. It also requires counsel who is familiar with this type of case. It is not something to try on your own. Your post sounds as if you are trying to prosecute the case without an attorney. A very bad idea.
The above is not intended as legal advice.
Personal Injury Lawyer
Medical malpractice attorneys spend years working, studying and developing expertise. It is not relevant what doctors "often" do or do not do. The only thing that is relevant is what happened in this particular case at the time that harm is alleged to have happened. If I sense correctly that one is even thinking about going into a deposition without legal counsel, it is urged that a very long period of reflection be employed to reconsider.
Allow me to share a brief scenario: an individual with a potential dental malpractice case came to me after the deposition. In the deposition the injured person argued with the attorney, refused to answer questions, said they 'would get back to' the attorney and otherwise destroyed their own case. What was potentially a triable case was now not a case. A deposition is testimony, under oath, that can be and almost always is used at trial. There are volumes of material on what a litigant's obligations are in discovery in general and specifically at deposition.
Also, defense attorneys can and will use everything they can think of in the discovery phase of the litigation. My local law library in a small city has about a dozen shelves of materials for medical malpractice defense attorneys. They stopped buying the books when we all went electronic a decade or so ago. Your legal strategy is to forsee what will be effective at trial and one would no more go forward on a medical malpractice case without a seasoned med mal attorney than they would do their own heart surgery without a surgeon.