In medical malpractice cases, the concept of comparative negligence can significantly impact the outcome of a claim. Comparative negligence refers to situations where both the patient and the healthcare provider share some degree of fault for the injury. Here’s how it applies in medical malpractice and what it means for both parties involved.
What is Comparative Negligence?
Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine used to assign fault when more than one party contributes to an injury or damage. In a medical malpractice case, this could mean that while the healthcare provider may have acted negligently, the patient’s own actions (or lack thereof) also contributed to the injury.
There are two main types of comparative negligence systems in the U.S.:
- Pure comparative negligence – In states that follow this system, the plaintiff (the injured patient) can recover damages even if they are found to be more at fault than the defendant healthcare provider. However, their compensation will be reduced by their percentage of fault. For example, if the patient is found 60% at fault, they can still recover 40% of the total damages.
- Modified comparative negligence – Under this system, the plaintiff can only recover damages if their fault is below a certain threshold, typically 50% or 51%. If the patient’s fault exceeds this threshold, they are barred from recovering any damages.
How Does Comparative Negligence Arise in Medical Malpractice?
In medical malpractice cases, comparative negligence can arise in various ways. These include:
- Failure to follow medical advice: If a patient ignores the instructions or treatment plan prescribed by their doctor, and this failure contributes to their injury, they may be found partially at fault.
- Pre-existing conditions: Sometimes, a patient’s existing medical conditions may complicate treatment or increase the risk of injury. If the patient didn’t fully disclose these conditions, they could bear some responsibility for the harm.
- Delaying treatment: Patients who wait too long to seek medical care or follow up on symptoms might worsen their condition. If the delay contributed to their injury, they may be partially liable.
Proving Comparative Negligence
In a medical malpractice claim, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to establish that the healthcare provider acted negligently. However, the defendant may argue that the patient’s own negligence contributed to the injury.
To succeed in a comparative negligence defense, the healthcare provider (or their legal team) must show:
- The patient acted in a way that deviated from what a reasonable person would have done under similar circumstances.
- The patient’s actions directly contributed to their injury or worsened the harm caused by the provider’s negligence.
The Impact on Damages
The concept of comparative negligence can significantly reduce the compensation a plaintiff receives. For example, in a case where total damages are calculated at $200,000, if the patient is found 30% at fault, they would only be entitled to recover $140,000.
In states that follow modified comparative negligence, if the patient is found more than 50% at fault, they may be entirely barred from receiving any compensation.
Contact Otorowski & Golden, PLLC
Please know that our firm is here to help if you were injured due to a medical provider’s malpractice. Otorowski & Golden, PLLC provides free consultations to all our potential clients. The attorneys at our law firm also have over 120 years of combined experience representing injured parties in medical malpractice cases. They never back down to insurers and fight for their clients’ interests every step of the way. Do yourself a favor and contact them now for the quality legal representation you deserve.