Since its formation in 1969, medical malpractice defense practice has been a cornerstone of the Kitch firm. Through our unparalleled experience in representing hospitals, physicians, and other health providers, we have earned the reputation as one of the country's preeminent medical malpractice defense firms.
Several key characteristics distinguish the Kitch firm when it comes to medical malpractice defense.
Medical Malpractice Specialists
The attorneys who defend medical malpractice cases at the Kitch firm have devoted all or virtually all of their practice exclusively to defending medical malpractice cases. This intense focus has allowed them to truly become medical malpractice specialists, capable of understanding and coordinating the intricate medical issues and practice approaches which can make this type of litigation very complex. Our experience has also allowed our attorneys to develop expertise in, and focus their attention on, particular medical fields. In addition to the firm lawyers who sub-specialize in birth trauma cases and serve clients nationally, our malpractice defense lawyers have developed special experience and expertise in areas such as breast cancer, cardiology, emergency practice, and gynecology. The depth and breadth of our senior trial attorneys' knowledge is unmatched in the region, and allows us to quickly and efficiently analyze complex medical care and develop a thorough defense strategy.
Coordination with Leading Physicians
Our extensive experience and our integrity as lawyers have allowed us to develop very positive and trusting relationships with leading specialists, both regionally and nationally. These contacts are not limited solely to legal representation or physician work as expert witnesses. Our cooperative efforts have included frequent presentations on medical legal issues, in-house programs for physicians and hospital staffs, and partnering with physicians to co-author medical textbooks and articles. These efforts have promoted an increased understanding of the medical and legal issues confronting our clients and strengthened our ties with the physician community across the country.
The positive relationships we have developed with the medical community have also fostered a unique working relationship with leading physicians when there is a need for medical experts. Our qualifications and reputation allow us access to nationally renowned and highly credible physicians for consultation and expert review. Because of their trust and respect for the firm, we are often able to obtain consultations with these leading physicians on short notice. Our ability to utilize such leaders in the field as our experts means we do not rely on suspect expert witness services or overused experts whose credibility is subject to doubt and attack.
A significant challenge in defending any medical malpractice case is examining the "professional medical expert" who is often used by plaintiffs' attorneys. We have unmatched resources for meeting this challenge. Through our years of cross examination at trials and depositions, our attorneys have repeatedly interrogated countless physicians commonly employed as plaintiffs' experts. We have collected an unparalleled bank of prior expert trial and deposition testimony, allowing detailed and thorough preparation for future cross-examination. Based on our experience, we rarely encounter a plaintiffs' expert with whom we are unfamiliar. With this background, we are often able to predict and defuse expert criticisms before they are rendered. Our resources also help us to recognize and address theories and tactics used by plaintiffs' counsel.
A successful medical malpractice defense depends on an intimate knowledge of both medicine and applicable law. The Kitch firm has continuously led efforts to promote tort reform legislation, giving us a unique understanding of the intricate statutory requirements and provisions. Our first-hand understanding of the complexities of these laws allows us to aggressively pursue defenses and has been instrumental in obtaining early dismissal of claims or limiting the scope of claims that are brought to trial.
Our firm litigation philosophy is simple: Be Prepared To Try Every Case. Since the firm's inception, our medical malpractice attorneys have brought thousands of cases to trial, and are truly "battle tested." Although, for many reasons, some cases resolve before trial, being prepared to try every case provides the strongest tactical advantage and places our clients in the best position to achieve a favorable outcome.
Innovative Approaches and Cost-Effective Solutions
We fully appreciate the financial burden of lawsuits and strive to provide legal services in the most efficient and effective manner. Our background allows us to quickly and efficiently review medical records and process the extensive information commonly generated in a malpractice claim. We have introduced innovative approaches that can help minimize defense costs. We promote joint defense programs which foster a coordinated defense for multiple defendants to eliminate duplicative defense costs. Our in-house medical library and state-of-the-art computer capability eliminates unnecessary research costs. We also have in-house video conferencing facilities and on-line reporting capability to reduce travel and processing costs. Our legal staff also provides newsletters and legal updates which allow our clients to identify and address legal issues and trends to help minimize litigation exposure. We also provide a twenty-four hour "on call" attorney roster to allow our clients access to a principal attorney any time such needs arise. We also have a sophisticated travel arrangement system, which allows us to be highly cost-effective for air travel and lodging in other cities.
MacGregor Receives Defense Verdict - Published 9/18/09
MacGregor Receives Defense Verdict in Medical Malpractice Case
On May 21, 2009, Susan MacGregor of the firm's Upper Michigan Office received a defense verdict from a federal court jury in the Western District of Michigan, Northern Division, sitting in Marquette, Michigan. The plaintiff was rendered paraplegic when he developed an epidural hematoma following an uneventful epidural steroid injection administered by a CRNA. The jury's verdict determined that the CRNA obtained the patient's informed consent; the Court directed a verdict on all other claims asserted by the plaintiff.