6 Mistakes Attorneys Make with Medical Professional Testimonies

The testimony of the treating physician, often presented at trial by video deposition in Georgia, is one of the most important parts of a personal injury case. Yet I often see lawyers making basic mistakes that cause them to miss the opportunity to full leverage the benefits of the treater’s testimony.

Here are some common mistakes I see:

1. Not Using Visuals

Jurors aren’t medical professionals—they don’t know what a herniated disc or a comminuted fracture looks like. They don’t know all the names of different bones in the body or what they look like. They don’t know what certain medical procedures involve.

Don’t just talk about the anatomy, the injury, and medical procedures—show it. Use anatomical models or diagrams to explain anatomy. Use blown-up x-rays, 3D models, or medical illustrations to show the injury and any medical procedures.

2. Failing to Simplify Medical Terms

Doctors often use medical terminology that lay people don’t know. You may know what certain medical terms mean, but the jury doesn’t.

When the doctor starts throwing out medical terms, don’t just move on to the next question. Ask the doctor to explain any medical terminology, whether it relates to a description of anatomy or a description of an injury.

3. Burying the Lead

Too often, critical points get buried in lengthy testimony, increasing the risk the jury will miss a key point. Identify the key issues (e.g., the injury, opinions on causation, prognosis, and impact on your client) and hit them early and clearly in the deposition.

4. Ignoring the Patient’s Symptoms

Symptoms are the bridge to non-economic damages like pain and suffering. What did the patient report? What does this injury feel like? Is it painful? How does it affect daily life? This testimony helps the jury understand the injury’s human impact.

5. Overlooking Prognosis and Expected Outcomes

What does the future hold for your client? Will the injury heal completely, or is there a risk of long-term limitations? Is there a potential need for future treatment?

Make sure the doctor addresses prognosis in detail. This can be crucial for damages related to ongoing pain, disability, fear of future complications, and the need for future treatment.

6. Missing the Worst-Case Scenario

What are the worst possible outcomes of this injury? Surgery? Disability? Was death a risk of the surgical procedure your client was forced to undergo as a result of the defendant’s negligence? Did the doctor discuss these risks with your client?

The fear and uncertainty of these outcomes are highly relevant to non-economic damages as fear of extent of injury is a category of pain and suffering.

In short, doctor’s depositions are important. Don’t mail it in. Take the deposition as if you were in trial presenting the testimony to a jury. Don’t just think about what the insurance company needs to hear to evaluate your case. Think about what the jury needs to hear, and see, to properly evaluate damages.

What do you think? Join the conversation with me on LinkedIn.