New York Personal Injury Law Blog: Medical Malpractice Trial Starting For Med-Blogger

Eric Turkewitz, The Turkewitz Law Firm, New York, NY  

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

 

Medical Malpractice Trial Starting For Med-Blogger

Flea is a pediatrician. One of Flea's little patient's died. Flea was sued.

Except that Flea is not just a doctor, but a blogger. An award winning blogger.

So he's doing something a bit different than other doctors that have been sued. Flea (photo at right) is blogging his experience as it happens, including contacts with his own attorneys, attorney-client privilege be damned. Make that a lot different than other doctors.

In what may be the most compelling and extraordinary story being played out in either the legal or medical blogospheres, the pseudonymous doctor discusses his experiences and emotions in depositions and trial preparation, including some advice and communications with his defense team.

In opening the door to the legal sanctuary however -- that is, the special place where all contacts with one's lawyers are protected -- he is running two giant risks:

First, if his cover is blown and plaintiff's counsel finds out he has been blogging, he can be cross-examined on those contacts and advice that he wrote about, for the privilege disappears when the substance is discussed publicly. Second, by opening that door, he runs the danger of his insurance carrier disclaiming against him in the event of a verdict on behalf of the plaintiff, on the claim that discussing his trial prep hindered the defense. The man is, if nothing else, a risk-taker in that regard.

His decision to walk this high-wire without a net brings us to a third issue: If plaintiff's counsel finds out about the blog, should it be used at trial? A lawyer's gut reaction may be yes, in order to claim to the jury that what they are seeing is a well-rehearsed act.

But if the risk is that the insurance carrier uses it as an excuse to disclaim on a plaintiff's verdict, it may be entirely counterproductive. In this sense, Flea shares a common goal with his nemesis: They both want the insurance company standing there in case of a plaintiff's verdict.

With jury selection starting tomorrow, I expect we will see quite a bit more on the subject. Some of the posts on Flea's experiences, starting with the most recent:
Addendum, 5/11/07 - Flea has now taken down the three most recent posts. See: Med-Blogger, On Trial For Malpractice, Takes Down Trial Posts

Second Addendum (5/16/07): The site was taken down completely on May 15, 2007, without explanation.

Third Addendum (5/31/07) Doctor "Flea" Settles Malpractice Suit After Blog Exposed In Court


(Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney in New York)

Labels: , ,


Comments:
Thanks for bringing the Flea malpractice case to our attention. It is fascinating to experience the daily feelings of the med mal defendant throughout the litigation, particularly one who can express himself the way Flea does. I can't help but wonder how his "insights" will change as the trial develops.

This is an experience that no attorney should miss.
 
I suspect that the plaintif will not introduce Flea's blog at trial. It could easily backfire. Particularly the part about most verdicts not being about the facts of the case but about how the jury "feels" about the doctor, and how the plantif's lawyer usually tries to manipulate those feelings. Raising that issue may preclude the plantif's lawyer from using that tactic. Abandoning their usual tactic and trying to litigate on the facts may be too risky a strategy.

Arguing that everything that Flea says is just a show, can easily be countered by the written record, and by other expert witnesses to testify as to the "standard of care".

I was surprised that Flea did post about it, apparently in real time. I strongly suspect that he didn't run them by his lawyer (as he should have) because his lawyer would have told him not to do it.

However, there are valid reasons for a doctor to have a blog, that of consultation and trying to learn and do better treatments. That Flea is an award winning blogger says a lot about his values and his skills and represent him "giving back" to the community.

Flea states that details on his blog have been changed to preserve confidentiality. I read his blogs, and in no way do I think the "substance" of trial prep was disclosed in a few paragraphs. I think (but I am not a lawyer) it would be a difficult to argue that by doing so he forfits attorney-client privilege.

I suspect that if he is questioned about his blog, that the sole purpose will be to rattle him, to put him under stress, to increase the "cost" of the litigation to him. The purpose will be to "defeat" him, not with facts and logic, but by destroying something that is of value to him.

I think that is a very high risk strategy for the plantif that could easily backfire. The plaintif's lawyer may then find themselves in a malpractice situation.
 
What this case really shows is that the quantity of information available about a defendant physician, expert, or any defendant or plaintiff involved in litigation, is far more plentiful and potentially harmful (or helpful) than many could have imagined. Future document requests and interrogatories will tend to focus more on learning the pathways leading to electronic content that can be traced to a party.
 
Post a Comment



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

 


The New York Personal Injury Law Blog does not accept advertising banners, pop up ads or other distractions from its content. But since The Turkewitz Law Firm is the sole sponsor, it may be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.)

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.

 

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?