re: BK responds to the GMA interview

quote:

---

For whatever reason, his Dad wanted maximum damage for LSU.

---

Who know$$$$

Yeah, but the kid-raping, buy your way into heaven type.

Slandering a coach and calling him a murderer is nothing.

quote:

---

Also, the suit currently filed is not a medical malpractice suit. They have filed a medical review panel proceeding against the doctor and probably the hospital. That's required before that type of suit can be filed in civil court.

I'd really like to read what was filed, but it's not available.

---

Correct. Technically it isn't a suit just yet.

All physicians in LA have the ability to purchase, along with their regular medical malpractice insurance, a policy from the Louisiana Patient Compensation Fund (PCF). It's 2 different premiums. The regular MedMal policy premium is usually much lower when the physician attaches a PCF policy to it. When he/she does, then any "claim" against them must be filed through the PCF FIRST!! The claim is then vetted by the team at the PCF to determine if everything is in order to reduce the workload and prevent truly frivolous claims. Why you ask? Because any patient may file a claim without an attorney. There is a fee which must be paid first before any review. Once the claim passes the review, it goes to the Medical Review Panel (MRP). This panel is made up of specialists that are of the same specialty as the physicians being sued (sometimes multiple physicians/specialties are in the same claim). One is picked by the patient's attorney, one by the defendants attorney and the third by the first two and/or the attorney in charge of putting the MRP together (many retired judges will do this for post-retirement income). Any physician currently practicing in the state of LA can be picked for the panel and they cannot refuse unless they can come up with a really good reason. The dollar reimbursement is very low when compared to the time needed to determine the correct decision. I've served on many where I didn't get paid at all, or by just one side.

After the MRP convenes, they give the PCF their findings. They can only side with the accuser if three conditions are met (all 3). Did the care deviate outside the local usual and customary standard of care? If so, was the harm caused directly/indirectly from this deviation? And finally, is the harm still affecting the patient and/or expected to continue to affect/harm the patient? The last one is tricky. Technically, if the patient has fully recovered, then there can be some award if the patient lost money due to the extra healthcare and/or did they lose income during a prolonged recovery (again, very tricky to win)?

The MRP also will determine if the hospital is to blame as well.

Finally, regardless of the outcome of the MRP, the patient and their attorney may still decide to file a suit and let a jury decide. Usually if the MRP determines there is fault, then a settlement is usually quickly made.

Damages: the limit is based soley on "punitive damages" and is applicable ONLY when the physician participates with the PCF. If it is determined that there has been a breach in care and there was harm and that harm will need medical care for lifetime, then the patient is basically given PCF medical insurance for life for the harm only. It's not always easy finding a physician who will accept this "insurance" (they do have a choice) because the patient/family has already demonstrated a willingness to sue. I don't agree with that stance but many do refuse.

Hope that helps. I've seen some cases go on for 5-7 years before finally being brought to court or settled. I've served on MRPs where the medical care was 4-5 years prior.