Las Vegas, NV personal injury attorney Keith E. Galliher talks about his approach to handling medical malpractice cases. The attorney is very cautious when considering medical malpractice cases. Many clients hold the misconception that if something goes wrong during a medical procedure, such as surgery, it automatically indicates malpractice. However, a poor outcome does not necessarily mean malpractice has occurred. Therefore, the initial step involves assessing the client’s account to determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that malpractice took place.

If there are grounds for suspicion of malpractice, the attorney must gather all relevant medical records, including those from hospitals, surgical procedures, and office visits. Following this, an expert physician should be retained—preferably one with specific training relevant to the case. For instance, if the case involves urological surgery, a urological surgeon would be consulted. Finding qualified expert witnesses can be a challenge, but there are services available to help locate and hire these professionals. This process often necessitates an upfront financial investment that clients may find difficult to manage.

Once the records have been reviewed and an expert consulted, the attorney will receive a preliminary opinion regarding the presence of malpractice. If the expert determines that malpractice did not occur, the attorney must communicate this challenging news to the client, providing an explanation of the expert’s reasoning. Clients typically appreciate this level of transparency, especially as they come to understand the significant costs associated with litigation and the generally low success rates for medical malpractice cases that proceed to trial—typically around 10 to 15% for plaintiffs and 85 to 90% for defendants.

For the attorney, agreeing to take on a medical malpractice case reflects a strong belief that the physician acted egregiously and a commitment to proving this claim in front of a jury.