Comments on: Oklahoma Supreme Court Eliminates “Affidavit of Merit” Requirement in Med Mal Cases https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/12/oklahoma-supreme-court-eliminates-affidavit-of-merit-requirement-in-med-mal-cases/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:41:14 +0000 hourly 1 By: Supremacy Claus https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/12/oklahoma-supreme-court-eliminates-affidavit-of-merit-requirement-in-med-mal-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-13547 Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:41:14 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/index.php/2006/12/oklahoma-supreme-court-eliminates-affidavit-of-merit-requirement-in-med-mal-cases/#comment-13547 I support this certificate of merit, for the purpose of accuracy of the medmal claim.

Its elimination is not all bad.

1) The certificate completely immunized the lawyer from any accusation of filing a frivolous claim. With it, the lawyer could use the defense of, “The medical expert said the claim had merit. I am not a medical expert.”

2) The justifications in this decision can be used to take down the privity obstacle to legal malpractice claims by adverse third parties, and possibly the “trial within a trial” practice in legal malpractice claims by clients of lawyer who have privity with the lawyer.

This certificate should have increased the rate of cases ending in settlement or verdicts in favor of the plaintiff, reducing wasted litigation costs for the plaintiff bar. With a 70% rate of verdicts for the defendant in medmal, one would think the plaintiff bar would welcome such a law.

Their opposition implies some claims are filed to extort money in the form of nuisance suits.

As a substitute, the highly successful plaintiff attorney will always have the support of an expert prior to filing a claim. If the plaintiff attorney could be sued by the defendant for legal malpractice, the claim could be the absence of prior review deviates from professional standards of due care.

]]>