Tennessee is one of the states we cover so this story caught my eye. (Actually, we are interested in what is going on in medmal in court cases and legislative bodies all over the country. You never know what state may end up leading the rest or what court case might end up setting a precedent.) According to the Insurance Journal:

A bipartisan effort by Tennessee lawmakers to limit frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits fell apart Wednesday and has likely stalled for this year.

The Senate unanimously passed a similar bill last month to require attorneys to have an independent medical expert evaluate the merits of a case before filing suit. It also would have given defendants 60 days notice before a lawsuit was filed.

But the consensus fell apart in the House after Rep. Rob Briley, D-Nashville, tried to attach an amendment that would have changed the rules for which medical experts can testify in malpractice trials. (Read The Rest).

What caught my eye though, was the spirited comment in response to the story that one reader left. He said in part.

The personal injury attorneys have again influenced their politician conterparts to block any effort to limit frivolous suits. Why? Because it affects their income. Instead, they let this drag-on while doctors and patients pay the price for ridiculously high medical expenses and Med Mal insurance. The standard for any tort claim against a medical professional should be “intentional acts or gross neglect”. Medical results are never 100% guaranteed. Sometimes the doctors do everything 100% properly, yet there is a bad outcome.

You can read the rest, but I’m going to take a wild guess and assert that he probably was not serious when he proposed that doctors boycott treating attorneys.

It does raise an issue to me, though: What sort of relationship does a medical malpractice attorney have with his surgical team when he is involved in a medical emergency? I’m sure that the staff would give him their same professional treatment that they show to everyone. But I also think that it could cause a tense and awkward situation–not one that would be helpful.

If you have any thoughts on the story, or comment, feel free to leave them. The comments section at Insurance Journal seems like it is still open as well.