Page 58 - Anatomy of a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

SVMIC Anatomy of a Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

the trial for the defendant. Again, sufficient preparation is the

key to not only surviving, but also prevailing.

The goal of the plaintiff’s attorney on cross is to chip away at
the physician’s credibility. One of the easiest ways to do that is

to bait the physician into becoming argumentative. Sparring
with the plaintiff’s attorney is never a good idea. Attorneys do

this for a living – this is their arena.

If you come across as angry, arrogant, know-it-all, sarcastic,
condescending, incompetent, or uncaring, you will erode the

goodwill you built up with the jury during your direct testimony.

Let your attorneys argue with the other side – they are
accustomed to being the villains.

Questions by opposing counsel at trial are often the same as

they were during the deposition but are often more focused.
The purpose of deposition questions was to cast a large net

while cross-examination at trial seeks to elicit a specific

response. As mentioned earlier, you can be impeached at trial
using your earlier deposition testimony. Be prepared for this by

reviewing your deposition transcript and discussing with your
attorney the weak areas in your testimony.

If your defense attorney objects at any point during the cross-

examination, stop talking immediately and wait for the judge to

rule on the objection. Should you need to see a copy of the
medical record to refresh your memory before responding to a

question, ask to see the record. It is better to review the record
in front of the jury than to speculate and be wrong.

Page | 58