Posted by on Jun 16, 2014 in Medical Malpractice | 7 comments

The law is generally beyond the ken of the ordinary person. Even when it is not in legalese, the many ands, ifs, and buts that typically apply to any law can make a layperson’s head spin, and require the assistance of a lawyer specializing in that particular type of law to make heads or tails of it. Medical malpractice law is no exception, and the fact that each state has different laws governing it that continually evolves makes it even more complex.

Medical malpractice law in Massachusetts is a good example. There was a recent change in the state’s medical malpractice system that took effect in the last quarter of 2012. These reforms (see Mass. Gen. Laws Chapter 231 sections 60L and 79L) are designed to encourage early settlement or resolution of medical malpractice cases. A Massachusetts medical malpractice lawyer would be updated on these changes, but not necessarily a general practitioner in personal injury cases, so it is important to be specific when asking for legal advice and representation.

Medical malpractice in Massachusetts is defined as injury sustained by a patient undergoing treatment as a result of a breach in the standard of care expected of a healthcare professional or facility. While the standard of care is a fluid concept depending on a number of factors, Massachusetts utilizes a tribunal consisting of a doctor (a specialist in the relevant field), a judge, and a lawyer to establish the applicable standard for each case. However, even if the tribunal determines that the facts of the case does  not support a medical malpractice claim, the plaintiff can still proceed with the case after posting a bond, and use other expert witnesses to show that there was a breach, and that that breach was the proximate cause of the injury.

There is a three-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice in Massachusetts, although because of the reforms to the law mentioned above, there is a required cooling off period of up to one year during which the plaintiff and defendant/s can come to a resolution and hold off on filing in civil court. At any rate, if discovery occurs after three years after the alleged causative event, the plaintiff can still make a claim provided it is done no later than 7 years after the event.


  1. 10-24-2014

    I really love this style of blog, thanks for writing.

  2. 10-30-2014

    Your blog is improperly displaying characters when I use Ubunto with Google Chrome. Just thought you should know!

  3. 10-31-2014


  4. 10-31-2014

    I shared this with my friends.

  5. 11-14-2014

    I sent this around, good post

  6. 11-25-2014

    Good post

  7. 12-2-2014

    Law is always so puzzling to me, thanks for making sense of it.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *