| In 1898 the New York State Court of Appeals ruled that physicians could be held liable for failing to meet "the standard of care" in the "locality" in which they practiced. That standard would be determined through the testimony of other physicians who would serve the courts as experts. This decision serves as the foundation for adjudicating medical liability cases.;From 1900--1920 medical societies sought to protect physicians by denying malpractice ever occurred. Societies organized the legal defense of their members, so long as they would never settle, admit error, or purchase insurance. By the 1920s, members forced the societies to purchase insurance, but physician pundits told doctors to avoid suit by avoiding inopportune remarks to patients, keeping good records, and avoiding poor patients. No one admitted to the possibility of error. Physicians were told to never testify against another physician.;During the same period the x-ray changed malpractice cases. Now the patient could show the nature of the injury at the time of the physician's care. Physician experts could see the film and make determinations. Objective evidence replaced testimony. Physicians still warned one another to never testify against a fellow doctor, but the number of suits brought continued to grow.;In the 1930s and 1940s, as physicians shifted patients into hospitals, malpractice cases frequently involved the hospital. The courts had protected hospitals, but several forces put hospitals in jeopardy. One was better paperwork. Workmen's compensation laws pushed hospitals to keep better records, and more records meant more fodder for attorneys. In the 1950s courts expanded hospital liability by allowing charitable hospitals to be sued.;During the 1950s and 1960s the courts expanded physician liability. Frustrated with physician reluctance to testify, courts allowed plaintiffs to use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, meaning that they could win a suit even without expert testimony. During the 1950s, several studies of malpractice were undertaken. One indicated that while physician leaders worried about suits (and therefore wrote about them and lobbied against them) the typical physician was not concerned. In the 1960s, the story of malpractice broke into the national press, and by the end of the decade the President and Congress were interested in researching the problem. |
