Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:48:33.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The resolution process and the timing of settlement of medical malpractice claims

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2019

Samantha Bielen ,
Peter Grajzl  and
Wim Marneffe
Samantha Bielen
Affiliation:
Faculty of Business Economics, Hasselt University, 3500Hasselt, Belgium
Peter Grajzl*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, The Williams School of Commerce, Economics and Politics, Washington and Lee University, 204 West Washington St., Lexington, VA24450, USA CESifo, Munich, Germany
Wim Marneffe
Affiliation:
Faculty of Business Economics, Hasselt University, 3500Hasselt, Belgium
*
*Correspondence to. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We draw on uniquely detailed micro-level data from a Belgian professional medical liability insurer to examine how different procedural and legal events that take place during the unfolding of a medical malpractice claim influence the timing of its settlement. Utilizing the competing risks regression framework, we find that settlement hazard is all else equal statistically significantly positively associated with the completion of those procedural and legal events that most effectively reveal factual information about the underlying medical malpractice case. Consistent with theory, settlement hazard is either unassociated or even negatively associated with the completion of other procedural and legal events. Our analysis, therefore, provides policy insights into which aspects of the resolution process could be emphasized, and which de-emphasized, in order to reduce the often excessive duration of medical malpractice claims and its adverse effects on the healthcare system.

Keywords

Informationmedical malpracticeresolution delaysprocedural and legal eventssettlementJEL classificationsI18I11K41
Type
Articles
Information
Health Economics, Policy and Law , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , October 2020 , pp. 509 - 529
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amaral-Garcia, S and Garoupa, N (2015) Do administrative courts favour the government? Evidence from medical malpractice in Spain. Journal of European Tort Law 6, 241–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amaral-Garcia, S and Grembi, V (2014) Curb your premium: the impact of monitoring malpractice claims. Health Policy 114, 139–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amaral-Garcia, S, Bertoli, P and Grembi, V (2015) Does experience rating improve obstetric practices? Evidence from Italy. Health Economics 24, 1050–1064.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ancelot, L and Oros, C (2015) Physician–patient relationship and medical accident victim compensation: some insights into the French regulatory system. European Journal of Health Economics 16, 529–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersen, PK, Geskus, RB, de Witte, T and Putter, H (2012) Competing risks in epidemiology: possibilities and pitfalls. International Journal of Epidemiology 41, 861–870.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertoli, P and Grembi, V (2018) Courts, scheduled damages, and medical malpractice insurance. Empirical Economics 55, 831–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bielen, S, Grajzl, P and Marneffe, W (2017) Procedural events, judge characteristics, and the timing of settlement. International Review of Law and Economics 52, 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, B, Chung, JW, Traczynski, J, Udalova, V and Vats, S (2017) Medical liability insurance premia: 1990–2016 dataset, with literature review and summary information. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 14, 238–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumenthal, JA (2005) Law and the emotions: the problems of affective forecasting. Indiana Law Journal 80, 155–238.Google Scholar
Boyd, CL and Hoffman, DA (2013) Litigating toward settlement. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 29, 898–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buzzacchi, L, Scellato, G and Ughetto, E (2016) Frequency of medical malpractice claims: the effects of volumes and specialties. Social Science and Medicine 170, 152–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charles, SC (2001) Coping with a medical malpractice suit. Western Journal of Medicine 174, 55–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cleves, M, Gutierrez, RG, Gould, W and Marchenko, YV (2010) An Introduction to Survival Analysis using Stata, 3rd edn. College Station: Stata Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, JC (2017) Information and settlement: empirical evidence on Daubert rulings and settlement rates. International Review of Law and Economics 51, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, FB (2000) In praise of irrational plaintiffs. Cornell Law Review 86, 1–32.Google Scholar
Daughety, AF and Reinganum, JF (2012) Settlement. In Sanchirico, CW (ed), The Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, Procedural Law and Economics, 2nd edn. Cheltenham and Camberley: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, pp. 386–471.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, RL (2004) Reactions of physicians sued for malpractice. In Eisenberg, RL (ed), Radiology and the Law, Malpractice and Other Issues. New York: Springer, pp. 74–77.Google Scholar
Farmer, A and Pecorino, P (1996) Issues of informational asymmetry in legal bargaining. In Anderson, DA (ed), Dispute Resolution: Bridging the Settlement Gap, pp. 79–105. Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Fenn, P and Rickman, N (1999) Delay and settlement in litigation. Economic Journal 109, 476–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenn, P and Rickman, N (2014) Information and the disposition of medical malpractice claims: a competing risk analysis. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 30, 244–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grajzl, P and Zajc, K (2017) Litigation and the timing of settlement: evidence from commercial disputes. European Journal of Law and Economics 44, 287–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grembi, V and Garoupa, N (2013) Delays in medical malpractice litigation in civil law jurisdictions: some evidence from the Italian court of cassation. Health Economics, Policy and Law 8, 423–452.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutierrez, RG (2002) Parametric frailty and shared frailty survival models. Stata Journal 2, 22–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helland, E and Tabarrok, A (2003) Contingency fees, settlement delay, and low-quality litigation: empirical evidence from two datasets. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 19, 517–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
High Council of Justice (2012) Annual Report 2011 of the High Council of Justice. Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
Huang, PH and Wu, H (1992) Emotional responses in litigation. International Review of Law and Economics 12, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, JW and Savoca, E (1997) Measuring the effect of legal reforms on the longevity of medical malpractice claims. International Review of Law and Economics 17, 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, JW and Savoca, E (1999) Accounting for censoring in duration data: an application to estimating the effect of legal reforms on the duration of medical malpractice disputes. Journal of Applied Statistics 26, 219–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, PJ and Stern, LW (1988) Relational exchange norms, perceptions of unfairness, and retained hostility in commercial litigation. Journal of Conflict Resolution 32, 534–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessler, D and McClellan, M (1996) Do doctors practice defensive medicine? Quarterly Journal of Economics 111, 353–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessler, D and McClellan, M (2002) How liability law affects medical productivity. Journal of Health Economics 21, 931–955.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lurie, PM (2013) Guided choice: early mediated settlements and/or customized arbitrations. Journal of the American College of Construction Lawyers 7, 167–175.Google Scholar
Noordzij, M, Leffondre, K, van Stralen, KJ, Zoccali, C, Dekker, FW and Jager, KJ (2013) When do we need competing risks methods for survival analysis in nephrology? Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 28, 2670–2677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priest, GL and Klein, B (1984) The selection of disputes for litigation. Journal of Legal Studies 13, 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reyes, R and Reyes, C (2017) At your defense: Medical malpractice stress syndrome takes its toll. Emergency Medicine News 39, 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, B and Hoch, I (2007) Malpractice litigation and medical costs in Mississippi. Health Economics 16, 841–859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sohn, DH and Bal, SB (2012) Medical malpractice reform: the role of alternative dispute resolution. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 470, 1370–1378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spier, KE (1992) The dynamics of pretrial negotiation. Review of Economic Studies 59, 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spier, KE (2007) Litigation. In Polinsky, AM and Shavell, S (eds), Handbook of Law and Economics, vol. I, pp. 259–342. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Studdert, DM, Mello, MM and Brennan, TA (2004) Medical malpractice. New England Journal of Medicine 350, 283–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandersteegen, T, Marneffe, W and Vandijck, D (2015) Physician specialists' perceptions of the medical malpractice system in Belgium. European Journal of Health Law 22, 481–491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandersteegen, T, Marneffe, W and Vandijck, D (2017) Advantages and disadvantages of the Belgian not-only-fault system for medical incidents. Acta Clinica Belgica 72, 36–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zuckerman, S (1984) Medical malpractice: claims, legal costs, and the practice of defensive medicine. Health Affairs 3, 128–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed