Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian Blog


Posted by Peter Akmajian | Nov 02, 2022 | 0 Comments

In the trial of medical malpractice cases, plaintiffs must present expert testimony to support key elements of the case.  These elements are whether the defendant health care provider breached the standard of medical care and whether such breach was a cause of the plaintiff's injury.

Experts are expensive, and it is often difficult to find experts willing to testify against another health care provider.  We use our best efforts to find well-qualified experts and do not bring cases unless the expert support is strong.

Over the years, the Arizona Legislature and the courts have established stringent rules regarding expert witnesses, including limiting the number of experts to one retained expert per side and per topic and imposing specific requirements on their qualifications. 

The stated policy reason for these rules is to prevent “frivolous” lawsuits.  The truth is more complicated, and sometimes these rules create unfair obstacles to those seeking redress in the courts.

The latest twist on this topic came from our Supreme Court last summer in McDaniel v. Payson Healthcare Mgmt, 512 P.3d 998 (2022).  In short, McDaniel allowed for more experts, but in a way that favored the defense. 

The defense lawyers in McDaniel used doctors involved in the plaintiff's treatment as additional experts on standard of care.  Defense counsel asked 4 treating doctors if the defendant doctor met the standard of care, and each supported the defendant.

Thus, after all was said and done, the defense presented 6 experts—the defendant himself, the retained expert and the 4 additional “treating” experts—to the plaintiff's single retained expert.  Not surprisingly, the defendant won the trial.

Disappointingly, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that this practice was generally allowable.  However, the court ruled that since the defense had not properly disclosed the witness' testimony, plaintiff was entitled to a new trial.

The McDaniel ruling adds to the challenge of medical negligence cases because now, the defense may use multiple expert witnesses under the guise of treating doctors.  While one may argue that plaintiff can also use treating doctors in the same way, it is rare for any treating doctor to testify against a colleague.

Despite the obstacles existing under Arizona law, we continue to pursue medical malpractice cases vigorously and with the most qualified expert witnesses possible.

About the Author

Peter Akmajian

Peter Akmajian is a trial lawyer with 30+ years of experience and 40 jury trials in Tucson, Phoenix, Yuma, Bisbee and Nogales under his belt.  These trials have mainly involved serious personal injury, medical malpractice and wrongful death.  He was a civil defense lawyer for many years before ma...


There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Our team works together - for you!

Our award-winning lawyers are backed by a talented, caring team of legal professionals, paralegals, bilingual assistants, notaries, and others - all dedicated to you, your case, and the compensation you deserve.

No fees and no costs until we win.

As such we always have your case and your best interest in mind. When you win, we win too by providing the best legal care possible.

Thorough investigation and preparation.

We tirelessly and thoughtfully prepare every case we represent as though it was going to trial. This lets insurance companies know that we are a force to be reckoned with. As such, we settle successfully 98% of the time.