Malpractice Law: Judicial, Constitutional, Common Or Institutional?

Medical and legal malpractice are two types of malpractice that are commonly heard in courts. Medical malpractice suits are common in the US, with between 15,000 and 19,000 suits filed against doctors annually. Medical malpractice law, derived from English common law, allows patients to seek compensation for any harm resulting from sub-standard treatment. Legal malpractice, on the other hand, occurs when an attorney's actions or inactions cause harm to a client by falling below the standard of care. While the specific elements of malpractice may vary by state, the four standard elements are financial loss or injury to the client, breach of legal duty, causation, and damages.

Explore related products

Medical Malpractice Law and Litigation

$99.95

Model Rules of Professional Conduct, 2025 Edition

$37.71

Pharmacy Practice and the Law with Navigate Advantage Access

$80.89 $152.95

Physicians and the Law: The Intersection of Medicine, Business, and Medical Malpractice

$62 $69

Examples & Explanations for Professional Responsibility

$47.48 $76.95

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$229.76 $359

Medical malpractice law

• A professional duty owed to the patient
• Breach of such duty
• Injury caused by the breach
• Resulting damages

The damages awarded in medical malpractice cases typically include both actual economic loss and non-economic loss, such as pain and suffering. The legal system in the United States encourages extensive discovery and negotiations between adversarial parties to resolve disputes without proceeding to a jury trial. Trial courts have jurisdiction over medical malpractice cases, with each state having at least one federal district court. Federal courts may also be appropriate for filing malpractice claims when complete diversity of state citizenship exists or when a federal question is invoked, such as the violation of a fundamental constitutional right.

Explore related products

An Introduction to Constitutional Law: 100+ Supreme Court Cases Everyone Should Know

$26 $34.95

U.S. Constitution For Dummies, All New Edition

$26.99

Constitutional Law: Principles and Polices (Aspen Treatise)

$97.32 $126.95

Constitutional Law: a QuickStudy Laminated Reference Guide

$8.32 $8.95

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$305

Constitutional Law For Dummies

$18 $29.99

Legal malpractice

Attorneys must follow the Rules of Professional Conduct established by the American Bar Association, which outlines the duty of care expected of all attorneys in handling their clients' cases. These include providing competent representation, maintaining client confidentiality, avoiding conflicts of interest, and communicating with their clients during the legal representation.

To prove legal malpractice, a plaintiff must show that there was an attorney-client relationship, that the attorney was negligent (breached the duty of care), and that the breach caused injury and resulted in actual loss or financial harm. This can be difficult to prove, as it requires substantiating what would have happened if the attorney had acted properly. In some cases, it may result in a "'trial-within-a-trial,'" where the entire original case is retried to determine if the outcome would have been different without the attorney's negligence.

Explore related products

Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$100 $345

A Short & Happy Guide to Constitutional Law

$28

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: Individual Rights

$76.95

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$296.95

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: National Power and Federalism

$59.81 $76.95

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$245.32 $359

Jurisdiction and venue

Types of Jurisdiction

There are different types of jurisdiction, including general jurisdiction, limited jurisdiction, and exclusive jurisdiction. General jurisdiction refers to a court's ability to handle a wide range of cases unless specifically denied by law or constitutional provision. California superior courts, for example, are considered courts of general jurisdiction. On the other hand, limited jurisdiction means that a court has restrictions on the types of cases it can decide based on factors such as the amount of damages claimed. Small claims courts and limited civil courts are examples of courts with limited jurisdiction. Exclusive jurisdiction means that only a particular court can decide certain cases, such as bankruptcy court, which has exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction.

Personal Jurisdiction and Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

When filing a lawsuit, it is important to establish both personal jurisdiction and subject-matter jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction refers to the court's authority over the person, business, or organization being sued, typically based on their residence or place of business. Subject-matter jurisdiction, on the other hand, refers to the court's authority over the specific legal issue or dispute being sued about. In the United States, personal jurisdiction must comply with Constitutional limitations and be authorized by a statute, whereas in the United Kingdom, it does not require a statutory basis due to the absence of a written constitution.

Venue

Venue is closely related to personal jurisdiction and refers to the county or location where a lawsuit is filed. The venue is determined by factors such as where the dispute arose, where an accident occurred, or where a contract was entered into or broken. In some cases, more than one venue may be appropriate, and the plaintiff can choose the most convenient or favourable location. For example, in a car accident scenario, the venue could be the county where the driver lives, where the car owner lives, or where the accident took place.

Jurisdictional Rules and Power

Jurisdictional rules define the conditions under which a judicial judgment is recognised as valid. These rules can vary between different actors and institutions, and they play a crucial role in structuring and allocating decision-making authority. Understanding jurisdiction as power helps clarify the role of the federal judiciary within the constitutional structure. Additionally, jurisdictional rules can limit the availability of certain forums without altering the underlying substantive entitlements of the parties.

Explore related products

Emanuel Law Outlines for Constitutional Law (Emanuel Law Outlines Series)

$56.5 $67.95

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$305.99

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: Individual Rights

$22.49 $74.95

Constitutional Law: An Integrated Approach (Doctrine and Practice Series)

$305

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: National Power and Federalism (Examples & Explanations Series)

$33 $74.95

Proving negligence

Duty of Care

The first step in proving negligence is establishing that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care. This duty of care refers to the legal responsibility to act with a reasonable standard of care to avoid causing harm to others. For example, in the context of medical malpractice, healthcare professionals have a duty to provide care that meets the accepted standards of their profession. Similarly, in legal malpractice, attorneys are expected to handle legal matters with competence and care, adhering to the standard of care that a reasonably careful and competent lawyer would provide in similar circumstances.

Breach of Duty

The second element to prove negligence is demonstrating that the defendant breached their duty of care. This involves showing that the defendant failed to uphold the expected standard of care, either through an action or inaction. For instance, in medical malpractice, a breach of duty could include a surgeon operating on the wrong body part or a doctor failing to diagnose a condition that another competent professional would have diagnosed. In the context of legal malpractice, a breach of duty could be an attorney missing crucial deadlines, failing to conduct necessary legal research, or providing negligent advice that causes financial harm to the client.

Causation

Causation is a critical aspect of proving negligence, and it involves establishing a direct link between the defendant's breach of duty and the harm suffered by the plaintiff. This causation element can be established in two ways: "but-for" causation and proximate causation. "But-for" causation, also known as "actual causation," requires the plaintiff to prove that the harm would not have occurred if the defendant had not breached their duty. On the other hand, proximate causation considers the scope of the defendant's responsibility and whether the harm was a foreseeable consequence of their actions.

Damages

The final element in proving negligence is demonstrating that the plaintiff suffered legally recognized harm or damages due to the defendant's breach of duty. This harm can take various forms, including physical injury, property damage, financial loss, or other compensable damages. For example, in a car accident, damages could include medical expenses, loss of income, vehicle repairs, and pain and suffering. Similarly, in legal malpractice, damages could be in the form of financial loss resulting from negligent legal advice or missed deadlines.

Jurisdiction and Venue

While not directly related to proving negligence, it is essential to consider the jurisdiction and venue when pursuing a malpractice lawsuit. Jurisdiction refers to the legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case, and it is crucial to ensure that the court has the power to determine fault and compensate the injured party. Venue, on the other hand, refers to the proper place where an injured party can file a lawsuit, typically the county where the incident occurred or where the defendant resides. Understanding the specific requirements and laws of the relevant jurisdiction and venue is vital when pursuing a malpractice claim.

Explore related products

Questions & Answers: Constitutional Law (Questions & Answers Series)

$29.5

Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Rights, Liberties, and Justice

$98.4 $123

Constitutional Law: A Contemporary Approach (Interactive Casebook Series)

$274.25 $308

State Constitutional Law: Cases and Principles (University Casebook Series)

$290

American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$260 $359

The Glannon Guide to Constitutional Law: Learning Constitutional Law through Multiple-Choice Questions and Analysis

$71.95

Damages and compensation

Compensatory damages aim to make the plaintiff "whole" again by covering their losses. They can be categorised into special damages, encompassing economic losses such as loss of earnings, property damage, and medical expenses, and general damages, which address non-economic harms like pain, suffering, and emotional distress. Punitive damages, on the other hand, are rare in malpractice cases and are intended to punish the defendant for egregious conduct.

The quantification of damages in personal injury cases is not an exact science. Solicitors often refer to similar previous court awards to determine appropriate compensation. Factors such as the age of the client and the severity and permanence of the injury are considered, with younger individuals receiving larger settlements for permanent injuries as they will have to live with the consequences for longer.

In some jurisdictions, such as Sweden and New Zealand, a no-fault system is in place for medical malpractice claims. This means that injured individuals can receive compensation without having to prove fault or negligence, making the process less adversarial and more focused on redress.

Additionally, in the United States, nominal damages may be awarded in cases involving violations of constitutional rights, even if no significant harm can be proven. This was affirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2021 Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski case, recognising the importance of redressing infringed rights.

Frequently asked questions