In a personal injury case one of the most important witnesses is our client’s treating doctor. The best course is to call the doctor live. Unfortunately, often the doctor will resist leaving her practice to testify because of the significant time commitment. When this is the situation the next best course is to DVD the doctor at her office. In this post we discuss direct examination of the treating doctor by way of DVD.

Know the Doctor. Meet the treating doctor before the DVD direct examination. This should be done before the defense deposition. Before meeting thorougly review her medical records including all records that predate client’s injuries. Review all other medical records as well. Go into the meeting with a complete knowledge of the medical history of client. In the meeting cover any similar injury so the doctor is prepared to address it in the deposition and later during direct and cross examination. Of  course, cover the injury at issue.

Conference Before Direct. Meet with the doctor again before direct examination. As with direct examination of any witness tell her what will be covered so she has a road map. Preparation is important but not at the expense of spontaneity. Direct examination should be conversational rather then rehearsed. Remind doctor camera is the jury.

Outline for Direct Examination

When in doubt stick to who, what, when, where, why & how questions. Rarely will you go wrong with this formula on direct. Make sure doctor is testifying on a more probable then not basis on opinions concerning nature and extent of injuries as well as conditions caused by event at  issue.

Backround. Name, address, medical education, association memberships, board certification (include teaching positions if applicable).

Nature of Medical Practice. Have doctor discuss type of patients she treats. Here you introduce the jury to the fact she treats traumatically injured patients, including patients with similar injuries to client’s. Also include questions about other areas of her medical practice. If doctor’s practice is limited to treating with no forensic examination component elicit this testimony. If there is a forensic component have her discuss the nature of this practice, and how it differs from a treating practice.

Treating Client. When did she begin treating client. If before injury what type of treatment. Cover pre- injury treatment or lack of treatment so jury hears pre-injury condition from you rather then defense during cross examination.

Treatment for Injury. Initial subjective presentation, examination (making sure you cover objective findings), diagnosis (making sure more probable then not caused by injury mechanism), and treatment plan.

Subsequent Follow up Appointments. Illicit testimony about all significant subsequent appointments. Make sure you cover subjective presentation and examination findings  (which is your objective evidence of injury). Cover referrals such as physical therapy and diagnostic studies. Elicit testimony on any significant medical record outside of your doctor. Also have doctor explain to  jury significant diagnostic findings and how they were caused by the injury.

Necessity and Reasonableness of Treatment. Have doctor testify that all treatment she gave and referred has been necessary to address client’s injuries. Then get testimony that bills for necessary treatment are reasonable. Cover future medical care necessary to adress continuing conditions as well as reasonable estimate of future medical costs.

Client Today. Disability or impairment (5th Edition AMA Guidelines), impact on activities, impact on employment, pain and suffering (past, present, & future).

Conclusion. On a more probable then not basis is condition a result of the injuries sustained in our case (causation). Is client/patient an exaggerating faker or legitimately injured person dedicated to recovery.

Posted by: Trudell | Permalink | Email This Post

•