How Our MDs Assisted in Preparing Deposition Questions Which Helped our Attorney Client to Win the Case?
How Our MDs Assisted in Preparing Deposition Questions Which Helped our Attorney to Win the Case?
Conducting depositions is a crucial aspect of the case discovery process for attorneys handling medical malpractice cases. However, preparing for these depositions demands dedicated time, effort, and specialized expertise. Trivent Legal MDs understands the challenges attorneys face, especially when deposition schedules catch them off guard. We recognize the importance of crafting precise, qualitative, and compelling questions, particularly when deposing doctor defendants. Trivent Legal MDs not only provides medical opinions pinpointing negligence but also offers invaluable support in formulating deposition questions that address key medical events and highlight gaps in care.How did Trivent Legal’s MDs assist our medical malpractice attorneys in handling a medical negligence case?
In a recent case involving a complex negligence claim, one of Trivent Legal’s key clients sought our expertise to respond to the defendant expert’s opinion. The case centered around Ms. XXXX, a 65-year-old female with a history of lung cancer and gastric adenocarcinoma. Despite radiation and chemotherapy, complications arose during a transhiatal esophagectomy performed by the defendant surgeon, leading to the patient’s unfortunate demise. Trivent Legal MDs meticulously reviewed the case details and confirmed instances of surgical negligence, providing insightful responses to the defendant expert’s opinions. Our experts highlighted contraindications for the surgical procedure, including prior irradiation therapy, and pointed out critical errors made during the surgery that contributed to the patient’s death.
How Did Trivent Legal MDs Expose Negligence and Counter Defendant Expert’s Claims in a Fatal Surgery Case?
Trivent Legal MDs, after reviewing the case details and the opinion of the defendant expert, confirmed instances of surgical negligence and provided expert insight into the complexities of the case. They identified prior irradiation therapy as a contraindication for the decision to perform a transhiatal esophagectomy due to mediastinal fibrosis. Additionally, they highlighted that the defendant surgeon had inadvertently injured the aorta and failed to perform a sternotomy earlier to control bleeding, ultimately resulting in the patient’s death. Our experts also meticulously addressed all points raised by the defendant expert, providing detailed responses supported by relevant articles and literature references. These references demonstrated the potential complications of transhiatal esophagectomy and emphasized guidelines recommending surgeons to convert to thoracotomy if the procedure is deemed unsafe.