The percentage of winning plaintiffs in medical-malpractice jury trials where reviewing physicians rated the evidence of negligence as “strong,” according to professor Philip G. Peters of the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law. In Doctors & Juries, a research paper published in the May issue of the Michigan Law Review, Peters says juries favored plaintiffs in only
20% to 30%
of cases where reviewing physicians found evidence of negligence “unclear.” In cases where the evidence was deemed “weak,” juries favored plaintiffs only
10% to 20%
of the time. Physician reviews, Peters says, suggest that juries are doing a good job of rejecting meritless medical-malpractice cases.