LNCtips.com: Plaintiffs Who Lie
Medical malpractice cases can turn on a dime when it's discovered that plaintiffs or defendants have lied to their attorneys. It doesn't happen often, but when it does, it can have serious consequences. This week we'll explore plaintiffs who lie and how you can help your attorneys with lying plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs may lie to obtain money or to punish healthcare professionals for perceived mistakes or poor health outcomes. Whatever the motive, detection of lies by plaintiffs can occur even before they become clients. Prospective plaintiffs may exaggerate their injuries, the sequence of events, or which healthcare professionals were involved. One red flag for me is when the plaintiff insists that all the providers were incompetent. For example, I would much rather have a prospective plaintiff tell me, "Dr. Silan told me my CT scan was normal. His assistant was there too, the one with the red hair and freckles," than a statement such as, "I asked every doctor and every nurse what the results of my CT were, and they all told me the CT was normal." LNCs can help attorneys by comparing the medical records with the prospective plaintiffs' statements, which will help to verify or refute the truthfulness of their statements. If involved with interviewing plaintiffs, it's crucial that the LNC collect accurate factual information for the plaintiff attorney. It's also critical that the LNC instruct potential plaintiffs inform their attorneys off any changes in their conditions.
The most common lies that I have seen by plaintiffs involve injuries that had resolved after the start of the lawsuit, unknown to any attorneys. One way for defendants to find out the status of the plaintiff's injuries is to schedule an independent medical exam (IME; also known by other names such as a compulsory medical exam or defense medical exam). An IME is a physical exam conducted by a non-treating physician of the defense's choosing. I have viewed IME reports that have completely supported the plaintiffs' injury claims and others that suggested the plaintiff's injuries had resolved.
Another way for defendants to determine the extent of the plaintiffs' injuries is to perform surveillance of the plaintiff's activities. For example, my firm had a case involving a 56-year-old woman who was bitten on her foot by her dog. She went to the emergency room of a large hospital, but the bite later became infected. She sued the hospital and the emergency room physician for medical malpractice, claiming that she was permanently disabled and had to quit her job as a waitress. Several years later, she testified that she was still disabled, had a bad limp, and walked with a cane. A month later, the defendants hired a private investigator who covertly videoed the plaintiff. The video showed the woman walking outside with a 6-year-old girl who was later identified as her granddaughter. The video showed the plaintiff walking without a cane and without a limp. Not only that, but she and her granddaughter held hands and skipped (yes, skipped!) down the street, then turned around and skipped back. Then the plaintiff and her granddaughter danced on the sidewalk. The plaintiff was just as limber as her granddaughter was. The case was closed after the plaintiff's attorney saw the video.
And then there's the case of Walking Wanda, a plaintiff who claimed to be a permanent paraplegic. A video of the plaintiff showed her walking with a cane. When the judge viewed the video, she dismissed the case and found that the plaintiff had schemed to defraud the court.
As you can see, when plaintiffs lie, it can have disastrous effects on their cases. Next time we'll see some of the common lies by defendants.
...Katy Jones