Improving the Qualifications of Experts in Medical Malpractice Cases

15 Pages Posted: 8 Oct 2001

See all articles by David E Bernstein

David E Bernstein

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty

Date Written: 2001

Abstract

For decades, legal scholars have recognized the problem of physicians testifying beyond their expertise in medical malpractice cases. This article explains why courts have historically been liberal about admitting testimony by unqualified or marginally-qualified experts in malpractice cases, discusses recent legislative and judicial innovations that have tightened the standards for admitting medical experts, and proposes a new "reasonable patient" rule that balances the need to ensure that plaintiffs with worthy claims are able to procure expert testimony with methods of assuring that only competent experts will testify.

Suggested Citation

Bernstein, David Eliot, Improving the Qualifications of Experts in Medical Malpractice Cases (2001). George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 01-24. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=286455 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.286455

David Eliot Bernstein (Contact Author)

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty ( email )

3301 Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201
United States
703-993-8089 (Phone)
703-993-8202 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://mason.gmu.edu/~dbernste

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
313
rank
89,948
Abstract Views
3,324
PlumX