Lawyers Referrals in Car Accident Cases: How to Keep from or Explain to a Jury

Posted on July 11, 2008 by Ron Miller
The Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog has a post on a issue that troubles many accident lawyers in our smaller to mid-sized case: how to explain to a jury the fact that the injury lawyer referred the client to a doctor. This post give some thoughts on the best way to handle the lawyer referral problem.
Tags: ,
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.tlrcblog.com/admin/trackback/79636
Comments (2) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Mark - July 11, 2008 8:49 PM

I am a DC and have had thousands of referrals from attorneys and have had to testify in court cases about my patients injuries and their treatment many times.

Why some attorneys are so afraid of this issue is beyond me. We all know good doctors and bad ones and the fact is you would refer to a good one and not a bad one. We all would. If a patient asks for a referral would you refer them to a bad one? Would you refuse?

As their attorney you are going to tell them to go to a doctor because I would assume they are injured. (If they are not, of course you wouldn't.) They are inevitably going to ask for a referral. They might have some one in mind already and you would probably not try to prevent them from going to that doctor, assuming he/she accepts LOP's or even takes injury cases.

Yes the defense attorneys from the insurance companies can make it look like some sort of scam between the attorney and the doctor and that is where being a good attorney and being frankly honest and forthwith will prevail. (Of course if you are the owner or indirect owner of the clinic then you ARE scamming and will have a difficult time appearing legitimate, which you are NOT. Or if you take payment for referrals or "kickbacks", so to speak, then you are NOT legitimate as well. You guys have NO hope and would be lying in any case and so you would be just looking for a lie to make you look legit. You would be scum in my book.)

The best one I ever saw was the attorney who began his questioning of me in this way:

Doctor we have met before, right?

We met at a party once, right?

I have referred many of my clients to you in the past haven't I?

You have referred many of your patients to me in the past also, right?

Do I tell you how to treat my clients?

Do you tell me how to represent them?

And so forth ....

This one even went so far as to ask ..

We have discussed this case before haven't we?

In fact we just met in the hall out side and I told you some of the things I would be asking you about my clients care and their injury, correct?

Did I tell you how to answer? (no)

Did I tell you what to say? (no)

Did I tell you that I would bring all this up before the jury? (yes)

You see? Very forth with and frankly honest, pulling tooth after tooth out of the defense attorney's mouth. Half of her questions had been answered before she even got to me.

So what is this problem with referring patients to doctors if, in fact, they are really hurt?

Come on, get some balls and stand up for your client and what is right for them. (Unless you are one of those scam attorneys that give this business a bad name.)

Ron Miller - July 14, 2008 9:19 AM

Thanks for the comment, Mark.

But to pretend that this is not an legitimate issue and all a lawyer has to do is "get some balls" is the kind of nonsense that causes real problems. In fact, read the comment on the original blog post where one lawyer talks about how much fun it is for a defense lawyer to engage in that cross. When I wrote this post, I was really writing about putting orthos up a trial. We rarely try a jury trial with a chiro but let's face the reality that the suspicions are going to be 10 times higher for a chiro than for an ortho. (Not saying that is accurate because often the opposite is the case. But we are talking about juries and perceptions are reality.)

Again, I believe the best thing for the client is to let them find their own medical care when possible.

The problem with your comment is that it ignores the reality: some clients with subjective injuries exaggerate their injuries. You say I would not refer them to a doctor if they were not hurt. How do I know if a patient with subjective injuries is actually injured? You make the best guess that you can but the reality is I'm sure I have been wrong many times both ways. If we pretend that a jury does not wonder about the appearance of a lawyer saying "this is the doctor you should go to" we are just kidding ourselves and doing our clients a disservice.

With objective more serious injuries, the patients are usually forced down a patient/doctor driven path because of the exigencies created by the injuries. But I've tried serious objective injury cases with lawyer referred treaters and I can tell you that it is something jurors process from talking to them.

I think the direct you provided is a very good one.

Again, thanks for the comment.

Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.