En Español

Category: Medical Malpractice

Trouble Finding A California Medical Malpractice Lawyer?

By Brian Chase on July 23, 2013 - No comments

If you or a loved one has been misdiagnosed or have been a victim of medical malpractice in the state of California and would like to take the doctor or hospital to court, you my find it very difficult to get a lawyer to represent you. There’s a reason California personal injury lawyers cringe at medical malpractice lawsuits – in this state, we have a $250,000 cap on medical malpractice awards and a cap on attorney’s fees. These two factors combine to make the pursuit of a medical malpractice not worth the costs and risks for wronged patients and their attorneys.

This cap on medical malpractice awards has been in existence for more than 30 years now in California. In 1975, the state enacted legislation capping malpractice awards and lowering attorneys’ fees (only for the patients’ attorneys) after doctors and insurers in California protested saying oversized awards and ever-increasing insurance rates were driving physicians out of the state.

What this law known as Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) essentially did was limit the amount of money for “pain and suffering” – which is the physical and emotional distress caused by an injury – to $250,000. There is no limit on what patients can collect for loss of future wages and other expenses. So if a non-wage earner dies because of medical malpractice the maximum jury award would be $250,000 no matter what.

But the big question that lingers all these years is: Has there really been a benefit to the public in terms of insurance premiums lower health care cost because of this cap? Victim advocates and experts who oppose the cap say: No. This law, they say, is increasingly preventing victims and their families from getting their day in court. This is especially true of the most vulnerable population such as low-income families, children and seniors. Opponents of the caps also argue that this limit on pain and suffering has never been raised or affected by inflation over the last three decades.

As for attorneys, it is not a cheap proposition. They bear the out of pocket costs of putting on these trials. Those costs easily exceed $75,000 and they have been skyrocketing over the years. Ad a discount fee structure and it makes no economic sense for attorneys to represent malpractice victims, they are much better off working for the medical providers and their insurance companies.

The malpractice caps are being reconsidered in many states because of the manner in which they have been hurting poorer patients. But California has never reconsidered these caps. A recent Los Angeles Times investigation revealed that the cap is in fact preventing many California families from getting their day in court.

Here are some of the findings listed in the Times article:

  • Court malpractice filings have fallen in eight out of the 10 most heavily populated counties. In Los Angeles county there was a 48 percent drop in filings since 2001 and a 29 percent drop in Orange County,
  • At Kaiser Permanente, where arbitration is the way rather than court, claims have fallen by 20 percent since 2001.
  • The number of payments to victims and their families across California had also dropped by 24 percent since 1991. The Times looked at a federal database of half a million claims to make that determination
  • Insurance companies have made record profits in California compared to other states. The Times article states that California insurers have only paid 39 cents of every premium dollar since 1991 while the national average was 63 cents.

In spite of these facts, proponents of MICRA paint a dire picture of a world without caps or increased caps saying that it would lead to significantly higher healthcare costs and limit patients’ access to doctors.

But several studies done on the subject especially one by The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, say the malpractice caps have not helped doctors either. The study says that other state policymakers should learn from California’s experience.

The state with its cap tried to set tort limits and voters through the passage of Prop 103 in 1988 set the stage for insurance reform. The study concludes that while the stringent continued regulation of malpractice insurance rates lowered premiums for doctors, malpractice caps and other restrictions on the tort system failed to provide doctors the relief they sought. This study found that malpractice rates rose six-fold between 1975 and 1988, until Proposition 103 was passed, after which those rates have held steady.

One of the largest studies done on the topic was by Dartmouth College researchers, which is also cited in the Los Angeles Times article. This study concluded that malpractice payments have risen along with medical care costs, while doctors’ insurance premiums grew way quickly – by double-digit percentages annually for some specialties.

The caps, above all, violate victims’ constitutional rights to due process and equal protection by limiting what they can receive for their pain and suffering. How it is equal protection if you suffer a particular injury because of a doctor’s negligence as opposed to a traffic accident and the doctor is not held fully accountable, but the negligent driver is made to pay?

A decision in Cooke County, Illinois, where a judge struck down a two -year-old state law that capped compensation to victims, has given new hope. According to an article in the Chicago Tribune, Cooke County Circuit Court Judge Diane Larsen decided that caps on malpractice awards violated the Illinois Constitution’s “separation of powers” clause.

She ruled that the legislature cannot interfere with the right of judges and juries to determine fair damages. Her ruling reportedly falls in line with a 1997 Illinois Supreme Court decision, which overturned a 1995 law setting caps on personal injury lawsuits.

Many California personal injury attorneys are looking for the “right case” to appeal to our state’s highest court with similar arguments to overturn these caps that are neither equitable nor beneficial to doctors or patients. We hope this law changes soon so patients can actually get fair compensation for their injuries or at least the opportunity to have their day in court.

What is the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA)?

The law enacted in 1975 basically did the following:

  • Placed a $250,000 cap on the amount of compensation paid to malpractice victims for their “non-economic” injuries
  • Eliminated the “collateral source rule” that forces those found liable for malpractice to pay all the expenses incurred by the victim.
  • Permitted those found liable for malpractice to pay the compensation they owe victims on an installment plan basis.
  • Imposed a short “statute of limitations” on malpractice victims (generally one year).
  • Established a lowered sliding scale for attorneys’ fees that discourages lawyers from accepting malpractice cases.

Source: How Insurance Reform Lowered Doctors’ Medical Malpractice Rates In California, The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights

Posted in: Medical Malpractice


Popular Da Vinci Robotic Surgery Raises Safety Concerns

By Brian Chase on March 8, 2013 - No comments

davinci robotics Use of the Da Vinci Surgical System has quadrupled in the last four years, according to a recent Los Angeles Times article. Da Vinci is a multi-purpose robot with four metal and plastic arms that can lend a hand with surgeries including heart bypass, hysterectomies and prostate removal.

It is important to understand that this robot is not actually performing the surgery. It is only mirroring the movements of the surgeon’s hands. But according to Dr. Marty Makary, a surgeon at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, the robot is more of a marketing tool to attract patients and doesn’t really do much to improve the quality of care.

The disturbing fact is that 12 years after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) first approved the Da Vinci, there is still no industry standard for training and credentialing doctors to use the robot, beyond a basic course by manufacturer. This leaves patients wondering as to whether their surgeon is experienced enough to perform the surgery using a robot.

Many Da Vinci lawsuits claim that hospitals allow surgeons without sufficient experience to use the robots. Some surgeons and hospital officials say the robots are being overused, even when there is no clear benefit.

…Read the rest »

Posted in: Medical Malpractice


Professional Groups Issue Recommendations for Use of Vaginal Mesh

By Brian Chase on December 14, 2011 - No comments

The America College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Urogynecologic Society have issued a joint Committee Opinion stating that there is an “urgent need” for the development of a national registry to track outcomes for all current and future patients who receive vaginal mesh implants. There have been serious concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of these synthetic mesh products that are placed vaginally to treat a condition known as pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Given the horrific side effects thousands of women are experiencing as a result of receiving these transvaginal mesh implants, these groups now recommend that use of these mesh implants should only be reserved for high-risk women “for whom the benefit may justify the risk.”

…Read the rest »


GlaxoSmithKline is Exposed For Poor Quality Standards

By Brian Chase on January 24, 2011 - 1 comment

During a recent 60 Minutes investigative report, GlaxoSmithKline, a major worldwide provider of prescription drugs, was exposed for their cover up in the early 2000s of mixing up drugs at a Puerto Rico plant, and whistleblower Cheryl Eckard was awarded a sum of $96 million of the total amount of $750 million due to the pharmaceutical litigation and financial settlement.

The plant was mixing up drugs, putting different dosage sizes and different medications together in mislabeled bottles, and shipping them all over the world, including the United States. A grandmother of an 8-year-old boy found that the pills of Paxil that her grandson had been taking the entire month were 25mg pills, not the regular 10mg pills he’d been previously taking. The child was very sick from taking the pills, which had been colored pink instead of the regular, yellow-colored pills.

GSK Denies, Denies, and Denies

When Eckard brought this to the attention of quality control, they all but ignored her and told her it wasn’t really happening. She wrote up report after report, but her warnings were falling on deaf ears. She even suggested shutting down the plant completely, but to the executives at GSK, that wasn’t financially possible, and simply sweeping it under the rug was a better option in their minds. …Read the rest »


Los Angeles Hospital Overexposed Patients to Radiation

By Brian Chase on November 24, 2009 - 2 comments

The California personal injury lawyers at BISNAR | CHASE are extremely concerned about this news report that 10 stroke patients were overexposed to radiation when they got CT scans at Glendale Adventist Medical Center. According to an article in the Glendale News Press, the patients received three to four times the normal dose of radiation during a triple imaging brain exam using a General Electric manufactured CT scan machine.
…Read the rest »

Posted in: Medical Malpractice


Jury Awards $164,000 to Los Angeles Car Accident Victim

By Brian Chase on October 26, 2009 - No comments

The California personal injury attorneys of BISNAR | CHASE recently prevailed in a jury trial against Lynch Ambulance, convincing a Los Angeles jury that a negligent ambulance driver and the company that employed him were liable for serious personal injuries sustained by two passengers –Tracy Mucklevane and Shawna Alonzo. Mucklevane’s case had already been settled. Jurors awarded Shawna Alonzo, who was then a respiratory therapist at Children’s Hospital of Orange County, $164,000 for her serious injuries.
…Read the rest »

Posted in: Medical Malpractice


Share this:

See All Awards, Ratings and Reviews

The BISNAR | CHASE Difference

  • “I went to law school knowing I wanted to be a personal injury attorney. I wanted my life’s work to have a positive impact on other people’s lives.”

    Brian Chase

    on what made him want to become a personal injury attorney

  • “I was in a serious auto accident when I was in law school. I had to hire a personal injury attorney and had a really bad experience.”

    John Bisnar

    on what made him want to become a personal injury attorney

  • “Everybody either drives in a car or rides in a car, so when I do the auto defect cases I really feel like I’m making the world safer by making vehicles safer.”

    Brian Chase

    on why he focuses on auto defect cases

  • “Whatever the philosphy of the management is, is going to be carried through by the employees and it’s going to reflect on the experience the clients have.”

    John Bisnar

    on his philosophy on running a law firm

  • “Corporate greed is a reality in our world and I see it time and time again. Especially, with the auto defect cases we focus on.”

    Brian Chase

    on corporate greed and how it affects the consumer

  • “The first thing we want to do with our clients is to relieve the stress. Make them feel comfortable. Treat them as an honored guest.”

    John Bisnar

    on how he would define superior client representation

  • “There are many, many defects in vehicles that can lead to life or death that could be fixed with a mere $40-$50 [on the assembly line].”

    Brian Chase

    on the shocking facts about the vehicles we drive

  • “You are dealing with people who are seriously injured or have lost a family member...Compassion is understanding someone else’s situation.”

    John Bisnar

    on the role compassion plays in his profession

  • “I’m convinced, because of all the lawsuits...the auto industry finally found out it was cheaper to fix the problem than to keep paying in the litigation.”

    Brian Chase

    on making the world a safer place

  • “...if [manufacturers] build a dangerous product and someone is seriously injured from that, some personal inury lawyer is going to call them on the carpet about it.”

    John Bisnar

    on how Bisnar | Chase has helped make the world a better place

  • “When you have a client come in that’s in a wheelchair...or you meet a wife who has lost their husband or they’ve lost their child, it’s diffucult not to get emotionally involved.”

    Brian Chase

    on the biggest challenges he faces as a personal injury lawyer

  • “I bring in the best employees that I can and I want them to have a workplace that is condusive to them doing their best work.”

    John Bisnar

    on the work environment created at Bisnar | Chase

  • “My motivation of going to law school to have my life’s work help other people...when I see that come to fruition, I’m very pleased and very happy with that.”

    Brian Chase

    on the accomplishments he is most proud of

  • “...it is part of our civic responsibility and it is our great fortune to be in a position to be able to help support our community...”

    John Bisnar

    on the importance of giving back to the community

  • “I was always jealous of doctors. They get to save lives and they get to heal. I don’t get to do that but I get to have a very big impact on another person’s life...”

    Brian Chase

    on the greatest satisfaction derived from his work

  • “Seeing the growth of my employees, seeing them mature professionally, personally, and grow into the great professionals they have become is tremendous.”

    John Bisnar

    on the greatest satisfaction derived from his work

  • “I’m the president-elect this year and I’ll be the president next year of the Consumer Advocate Attorneys of California and I find that to be a rewarding thing...”

    Brian Chase

    on being an advocate for the people of California

  • “There’s going to people that you meet, that you can mentor...You can make a difference in their lives, you can make a difference in their client’s lives.”

    John Bisnar

    on mentoring young attorneys

  • “We try to figure out how we can help [our clients] get through what they’re going through emotionally. Because just getting them compensated is only part of the job.”

    Brian Chase

    on the role compassion plays in his profession

  • “The Lakers have always been a winning organization, a class organization. I’ve used the Lakers as kind of a model for how to run my practice as well.”

    John Bisnar

    on his passions in life

Bisnar | Chase • 1301 Dove St #120
Newport Beach, CA 92660
local: (949) 203-3814
Get Directions

California Personal Injury Blog

Judge Says Nursing Homes Can’t Make Medical Decisions For Mentally Incapable Residents

An Alameda County Judge has ruled that a California law, which allows nursing homes to make medical decisions on behalf of certain mentally incompetent residents, is unconstitutional. According to a

read article

Mitsubishi Recalls Vehicles For Sun Visor & Brake Issues

Mitsubishi is recalling about 535,000 vehicles in two separate recalls, one involving problems with sun visors and another to fix issues with the anti-lock brake system. According to a report in

read article

Feds Investigate Ford Trucks For Power Brake Failure

Federal safety regulators have opened an investigation into 250,000 large Ford trucks after receiving 32 consumer complaints about brake failures. According to a report in Consumerist, the U.S.

read article


Copyright & Disclaimer

Disclaimer: The legal information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice, nor the formation of an attorney-client relationship. Any results set forth here were dependent on the facts of that case and the results will differ from case to case.

Bisnar Chase serves all of California. In addition, we represent clients in other states through our associations with local law firms. Through the local firm, we will be admitted to practice law in their state, pro hac vice, meaning "for this particular occasion." When in our client's interest, we employ the local law firm (at no additional cost to our client) to assist us with routine court appearances and discovery proceedings to more efficiently pursue our client's cause.

Copyright © 1999- Bisnar Chase Personal Injury Attorneys - All rights reserved.

SLS Consulting