My father died after a surgical complication in Massachusetts - why are people saying a "medical malpractice tribunal" has to review the case first?

Q: My father died after a surgical complication in Massachusetts - why are people saying a "medical malpractice tribunal" has to review the case first?

In Massachusetts, most medical malpractice cases do not go straight into normal litigation. They first have to pass through a medical malpractice tribunal under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 60B. The tribunal is a 3-person panel: a judge, a physician, and a lawyer. It does not decide who wins the case. It decides whether the evidence, if believed, is enough to raise a legitimate question that the doctor, hospital, or other provider was legally responsible. This trips up a lot of people who moved from other states, because many states do not have this screening step. At the tribunal stage, the family usually submits an offer of proof - medical records, expert opinions, and other materials showing what went wrong and how it caused the death. Live witness testimony usually is not the focus. If the tribunal finds the case has enough support, the lawsuit continues like a normal civil case. If the tribunal finds for the health care provider, the case can still continue - but the plaintiff usually has to post a $6,000 bond within 30 days. If that bond is not posted, the case can be dismissed. For a death after surgery, the claim is often a wrongful death and medical malpractice case together. In Massachusetts, the deadline is usually 3 years from the date of death, or from when the family knew or reasonably should have known malpractice caused it. There is also a 7-year statute of repose in most malpractice cases, with a narrow exception for a foreign object left in the body. Massachusetts also caps most malpractice pain and suffering damages at $500,000, unless there is substantial disfigurement, loss of a bodily function, or other special circumstances.

Question

My father died after a surgical complication in Massachusetts - why are people saying a &#34;medical malpractice tribunal&#34; has to review the case first?

Accepted Answer

In Massachusetts, most medical malpractice cases do not go straight into normal litigation. They first have to pass through a medical malpractice tribunal under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 231, § 60B.

The tribunal is a 3-person panel: a judge, a physician, and a lawyer. It does not decide who wins the case. It decides whether the evidence, if believed, is enough to raise a legitimate question that the doctor, hospital, or other provider was legally responsible.

This trips up a lot of people who moved from other states, because many states do not have this screening step.

At the tribunal stage, the family usually submits an offer of proof - medical records, expert opinions, and other materials showing what went wrong and how it caused the death. Live witness testimony usually is not the focus.

If the tribunal finds the case has enough support, the lawsuit continues like a normal civil case.

If the tribunal finds for the health care provider, the case can still continue - but the plaintiff usually has to post a $6,000 bond within 30 days. If that bond is not posted, the case can be dismissed.

For a death after surgery, the claim is often a wrongful death and medical malpractice case together. In Massachusetts, the deadline is usually 3 years from the date of death, or from when the family knew or reasonably should have known malpractice caused it. There is also a 7-year statute of repose in most malpractice cases, with a narrow exception for a foreign object left in the body.

Massachusetts also caps most malpractice pain and suffering damages at $500,000, unless there is substantial disfigurement, loss of a bodily function, or other special circumstances.