A civil trial, including medical malpractice and negligence, are used to settle non-criminal disputes. Generally, patients are seeking compensation for some sort of wrong and they will hire medical malpractice attorneys to bring forth the case. At trial, both parties present evidence in an attempt to demonstrate their case and persuade the trier of fact, a judge or jury, of the strength of their position. In order to find the truth of the matter, the adversarial approach is used in American jurisdictions to settle civil litigation.
Describing the Adversarial Approach
The lawyers and the defense team will present opposing legal arguments and use the facts of the situation to prove their case as they go head to head against one another. The purpose of the adversarial approach is to arrive at a just result. The logic is that the truth is more likely to become evident when each side contests the facts and law, giving the trier of fact the full scope of the dispute. The burden of proof in medical malpractice cases is a preponderance of the evidence. This standard can be described as the debated proposition, “more likely than not.” For example, if medical malpractice attorneys can prove that it is more likely than not that a doctor failed to live up to the standard of care required by the medical profession and this resulted in harm to the plaintiff, the victim has sustained its burden in proving the case.
Medical Malpractice Attorneys in New Jersey and Philadelphia
If you or a family member have recently been the victim of medical negligence, it is possible that you would like to speak with our professionals. Please contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation, or call for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia.
Persaud, a sworn juror in a medical malpractice civil trial, contacted the plaintiff and said that he had some important information about the defendant that was crucial to the lawsuit. Through a telephone conversation, Persaud spoke to the mother of the plaintiff and arranged to meet the plaintiff’s father at a local hardware store to discuss the information. The father immediately recognized the juror, who made assurances that he could sway the jury in the plaintiff’s favor in return for a five percent cut of the damages awarded. The family contacted the plaintiff’s medical malpractice attorney soon after the phone call and the news was promptly brought to the judge on Monday. The judge, in turn, contacted the DA’s Office and after a short investigation, the juror was arrested when he returned to court on Tuesday. If Persaud is convicted of all the charges that have been brought against him, he could face up to seven years in prison. Due to this gross misconduct on the behalf of the juror, medical malpractice attorneys fear that the plaintiff’s pursuit of a fair and impartial trial will be substantially delayed.