Tygod suing the doctor who hastened Herbert’s ascension

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Then it will be “pain and suffering” and “loss of future earnings.” They will have a hard time saying that he didn’t lose at least $5M.

 

I don’t know what the team doctor’s carry for limits (my guess is at least $5M as that was the demand). When we insured the Saints they carried a $75M umbrella but only $25M for the liability for brain injuries. Umbrellas don’t sit over professional liability but that gives you an idea as to the per occurrence limits. The team doctor’s are probably carrying a minimum of $10M for situations like this.

 

Fwiw, former Chargers Doctor David Chao was twice found guilty of medical malpractice. 

“They threatened my career if I didn’t undergo this. They made that decision and then punctured my lung.”

Forced to do it…

 

He's a big boy, the "they forced me" isn't a valid excuse. 

[Kirby Jackson]

9 hours ago, Doc said:

 

He's a big boy, the "they forced me" isn't a valid excuse. 

If your job tells you to do something… “If you don’t get this treatment, Justin is taking over while you’re out.” That happens all the time!! This is big business.
 

The doctor and Chargers are going to have to prove that all of this is just coincidental. They’ll have to do that with a history of medical malpractice within their organization. The facts are what they are. The team doctor, punctured his lung and he was no longer starting. Everything else is conjecture. All of the facts support Tyrod’s claim. From a claim standpoint this seems clear as day. Maybe they squabble over the number a little but not much. 

Edited September 19, 2022 by Kirby Jackson

[Doc]

12 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

If your job tells you to do something… “If you don’t get this treatment, Justin is taking over while you’re out.” That happens all of the time!! This is big business.
 

The doctor and Chargers are going to have to prove that all of this is just coincidental. They’ll have to do that with a history of medical malpractice within their organization. The facts are what they are. The team doctor, punctured his lung and he was no longer starting. Everything else is conjecture. All of the facts support Tyrod’s claim. From a claim standpoint this seems clear as day. Maybe they squabble over the number a little but not much. 

 

How many people lost their jobs for not getting the COVID vaccine?  You make your choices based on what you want.  He wanted to keep starting so he consented to a procedure with pneumo as a known complication (not malpractice) and unfortunately for him, it happened.  If he didn't get the shot...he would have been lost his starting job anyway because he would have been in too much pain to play. 

 

And again, every QB drafted in the top-10 in the previous 5 years, and even 2 QBs in his draft class, started their rookie season and didn't relinquish it the next year, meaning he would have been benched anyway.  Meanwhile he came to the Chargers after being signed as a starter in Cleveland and losing it because of poor play...to a top-10 drafted rookie.

 

And what will the doctors and Chargers have to prove?  That they didn't intentionally drop his lung?  No, Tyrod will have to do that.  The best he car argue is for incentives lost because no one considered him a starting QB after what transpired in Cleveland and Buffalo.

Edited September 19, 2022 by Doc

[Mr. WEO]

14 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

 

Seriously?!? He can EASILY make the case that they acted in bad faith to replace him. He can say that their negligence impacted his future earnings!! This is so simple. I’ve seen MANY claims setttled with WAY less evidence. Tyrod has even left the door open to ammend the claim asking for more. I suspect that the carrier will offer the $5M and the Chargers will be fine with it (the Chargers have a say in settling a professional liability claim because of the potential for reputational damage). That’s different from a GL or WC claim where the carrier has 100% say in settling. Tyrod does not have to prove that they were negligent. They have to prove that they weren’t!! He already has “proven” that he lost wages and that he was seriously injured by them. He can point to their desire to play the rookie as their motivation. They will cut the check and move on.
 

 

13 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s pretty much already proven with everything that has transpired since. That’s the point!! He can point to the money difference from where he was to where he is. He can say that they wanted to replace him. Now they have to say all of that isn’t true…

 

I’ve read multiple articles on it and know a little about medical malpractice (and insurance in general). This one isn’t going to be complicated. 

 

11 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I didn’t realize that the contract was the same. Did they pay him on all of his incentives? 
 

Either way, the insurance company will cut a check and move on. I see this kind of thing every single day. I’ll be SHOCKED if there isn’t a settlement reached.

He doesn’t need more proof than “I was starting, they shot me up, punctured a lung and I wasn’t starting anymore.” That is bulletproof. He has facts. They don’t. That IS what happened. If he were already the backup, maybe (although he’d still collect for med mal). I’m actually STUNNED that people think he won’t get $. That’s why professional liability insurance exists!! 

 

10 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Then it will be “pain and suffering” and “loss of future earnings.” They will have a hard time saying that he didn’t lose at least $5M.

 

I don’t know what the team doctor’s carry for limits (my guess is at least $5M as that was the demand). When we insured the Saints they carried a $75M umbrella but only $25M for the liability for brain injuries. Umbrellas don’t sit over professional liability but that gives you an idea as to the per occurrence limits. The team doctor’s are probably carrying a minimum of $10M for situations like this.

 

Fwiw, former Chargers Doctor David Chao was twice found guilty of medical malpractice. 

“They threatened my career if I didn’t undergo this. They made that decision and then punctured my lung.”

Forced to do it…

 

I am not an attorney or doctor. I do run a property and casualty agency that handles over $260M of premium annually. We see things like this ALL the time. There is almost always a significant payment. This will absolutely be in the millions. It may not be $5M (although I think it will). This is a very, very, very difficult case for the insurance company to try to defend. 

 

 

The Chargers aren't named in the suit as a Defendant.  They won't be telling the doctor/his practice's insurer how much to pay Taylor...

 

The Browns traded for TT and named his starter when rookie minicamp started--meaning Hue Jackson traded for TT to have him start over rookie Mayfield--he was explicit about this.  And what did they pay their incoming, new starting QB?  Only 1 year and 10 million--hardly  veteran starting QB money.  

 

What happened next?  He was injured in week 3 and replaced forever by the rookie QB.  No word yet on his lawsuit against the Browns....

 

Then the Chargers signed him as a likely starter in week 1 ahead of Herbert.  What did they pay their likely starting QB?  2 years 11 million.  Injured and lost his job to an infinitely better rookie.

 

On to Houston where he was brought in to be the likely starter after Watson told Culley he will never play for Houston again. What did they sign their new starting QB for?  2.5 million dollars.  Guess what happened next......that's right, injured again ( he made it to Week 2) and again replaced by a rookie QB--this time by the worst of the 3. 

 

On to the Giants.  More backup money

.

 

So it is obvious TT cannot make any serious claim that he lost "FA starter money"---he took far less to be stating on the Browns and the Texans.  At every stop since the Bills, every HC has seen the guy get injured and not be able to supplant the rookie behind him when reactivated.  He's not a starting caliber QB.  He gets injured all the time and then beaten out by rookies.  

 

Therefore he cannot (and certainly has not) "proven lost wages".  It will also be hard to argue loss of future earnings when he lost no earnings--back on the active roster after a few weeks off and making his full salary all along.  Plus, he went on to get another 11 million over the following 2 years (and counting) by 2 more teams. 

 

"Threatened his career"?  "Forced him to take the shot"?  Is that even alleged in the suit or are you simply making that up as well?   Pretty wild stuff lol.

 

You seem, bizarrely, to believe that medical complication is always evidence of medical malpractice.  I enjoy when posters say "I'm not a doctor or a lawyer"....yet go on to claim "I see this happen ALL the time".  Of the small number of cases that go to trial, the overwhelming majority are wins for the defendant:

 

"Physicians win 80% to 90% of the jury trials with weak evidence of medical negligence, approximately 70% of the borderline cases, and even 50% of the trials in cases with strong evidence of medical negligence. With only one exception, all of the studies of malpractice settlements also find a correlation between the odds of a settlement payment and the quality of care provided to the plaintiff. Between 80% and 90% of the claims rated as defensible are dropped or dismissed without payment".

 

You also claim you would be "shocked" if this didn't settle.  Yet this suit was scheduled to go to trial in November until both sides decided to wait out this season and now it is scheduled for April.  So we can assume discover is over and no settlement was reached.  What are you shocked about? The insurer must think this is a winnable case or they would have settled.   How do you explain this--you said this is the easiest case to settle. 

[FireChans]

16 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

 

 

 

The Chargers aren't named in the suit as a Defendant.  They won't be telling the doctor/his practice's insurer how much to pay Taylor...

 

The Browns traded for TT and named his starter when rookie minicamp started--meaning Hue Jackson traded for TT to have him start over rookie Mayfield--he was explicit about this.  And what did they pay their incoming, new starting QB?  Only 1 year and 10 million--hardly  veteran starting QB money.  

 

What happened next?  He was injured in week 3 and replaced forever by the rookie QB.  No word yet on his lawsuit against the Browns....

 

Then the Chargers signed him as a likely starter in week 1 ahead of Herbert.  What did they pay their likely starting QB?  2 years 11 million.  Injured and lost his job to an infinitely better rookie.

 

On to Houston where he was brought in to be the likely starter after Watson told Culley he will never play for Houston again. What did they sign their new starting QB for?  2.5 million dollars.  Guess what happened next......that's right, injured again ( he made it to Week 2) and again replaced by a rookie QB--this time by the worst of the 3. 

 

On to the Giants.  More backup money

.

 

So it is obvious TT cannot make any serious claim that he lost "FA starter money"---he took far less to be stating on the Browns and the Texans.  At every stop since the Bills, every HC has seen the guy get injured and not be able to supplant the rookie behind him when reactivated.  He's not a starting caliber QB.  He gets injured all the time and then beaten out by rookies.  

 

Therefore he cannot (and certainly has not) "proven lost wages".  It will also be hard to argue loss of future earnings when he lost no earnings--back on the active roster after a few weeks off and making his full salary all along.  Plus, he went on to get another 11 million over the following 2 years (and counting) by 2 more teams. 

 

"Threatened his career"?  "Forced him to take the shot"?  Is that even alleged in the suit or are you simply making that up as well?   Pretty wild stuff lol.

 

You seem, bizarrely, to believe that medical complication is always evidence of medical malpractice.  I enjoy when posters say "I'm not a doctor or a lawyer"....yet go on to claim "I see this happen ALL the time".  Of the small number of cases that go to trial, the overwhelming majority are wins for the defendant:

 

"Physicians win 80% to 90% of the jury trials with weak evidence of medical negligence, approximately 70% of the borderline cases, and even 50% of the trials in cases with strong evidence of medical negligence. With only one exception, all of the studies of malpractice settlements also find a correlation between the odds of a settlement payment and the quality of care provided to the plaintiff. Between 80% and 90% of the claims rated as defensible are dropped or dismissed without payment".

 

You also claim you would be "shocked" if this didn't settle.  Yet this suit was scheduled to go to trial in November until both sides decided to wait out this season and now it is scheduled for April.  So we can assume discover is over and no settlement was reached.  What are you shocked about? The insurer must think this is a winnable case or they would have settled.   How do you explain this--you said this is the easiest case to settle. 

Full send! @Doc could never!

 

them surgery boys built different!

[stuvian]

I hope TT cleans them out. A punctured lung can be deadly. Just another of the many ways in which the Bolts are an incompetent franchise

[Beerball]

On 9/18/2022 at 9:56 AM, FireChans said:

 

 

Can’t say I blame him. Any real docs out there who can opine w how frequently this happens (punctured lung)?

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Beerball said:

Can’t say I blame him. Any real docs out there who can opine w how frequently this happens (punctured lung)?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11535906/
 

1.4%

[Beerball]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11535906/
 

1.4%

Then in my book he’s due.

[FireChans]

Just now, Beerball said:

Then in my book he’s due.

Why?

[FireChans]

Just now, Doc said:

Could never…know how it feels? True. How does it?

A little less time doing the NYT crossword puzzle behind that curtain, and a little bit more TBDing out of you.

[Doc]

59 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Full send! @Doc could never!

 

them surgery boys built different!

Could never…know how it feels to be sued? True. How does it?

[The Jokeman]

On what grounds? Did he have a clause in his contract that get $5 million if played X amount of games in San Diego/LA? Either way I can't see how his lawyer can prove he'd have played even if he was healthy. 

[Beerball]

28 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Why?

Why not?

[FireChans]

Just now, Beerball said:

Why not?

Because 1% is not zero, and a bad outcome does not equal negligence?

[PetermansRedemption]

Maybe he should have just played better and not been replaced by rookie QBs every time he ever got a shot at starting. 

[BarleyNY]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

Because 1% is not zero, and a bad outcome does not equal negligence?

 

The first hurdle in a med mal case is standard of care. IOW the expected level of care from a reasonably skilled doctor under the same circumstances. The expectations include factors such as specific circumstances and specifics about the medical practitioner.  For example a specialist would have a higher standard in their own specialty than a GP would. An NFL team doctor definitely would have a higher standard than average.

 

Waivers regarding known complications and risks are not get out of jail free cards. They do not impact standard of care requirements. From what I’ve seen they have 3 uses:

- educating patients on the risks of a procedure

- discouraging claims

- protecting the medical professional when adequate standard of care is given

 

In a nutshell, a bad outcome is not necessarily due to malpractice. But it certainly can be. IMO this would be a fairly easy hurdle for TT’s lawyers to clear. The second hurdle is the injury to the patient. That’s straightforward. The last one is the actual damage done. In this case, it is any money that it cost TT in terms of future earnings? I agree that it is debatable if it did cost him anything. But here is a real issue. The burden of proof in med mal cases is almost always “preponderance of evidence”. That’s anything greater than 50%. Between the risk of the verdict going against them, the legal costs and the possible jury award (which could be far more than $5M) there is no way an insurance company take this case to a verdict. The math will dictate that they settle.

[FireChans]

17 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

The first hurdle in a med mal case is standard of care. IOW the expected level of care from a reasonably skilled doctor under the same circumstances. The expectations include factors such as specific circumstances and specifics about the medical practitioner.  For example a specialist would have a higher standard in their own specialty than a GP would. An NFL team doctor definitely would have a higher standard than average.

 

Waivers regarding known complications and risks are not get out of jail free cards. They do not impact standard of care requirements. From what I’ve seen they have 3 uses:

- educating patients on the risks of a procedure

- discouraging claims

- protecting the medical professional when adequate standard of care is given

 

In a nutshell, a bad outcome is not necessarily due to malpractice. But it certainly can be. IMO this would be a fairly easy hurdle for TT’s lawyers to clear. The second hurdle is the injury to the patient. That’s straightforward. The last one is the actual damage done. In this case, it is any money that it cost TT in terms of future earnings? I agree that it is debatable if it did cost him anything. But here is a real issue. The burden of proof in med mal cases is almost always “preponderance of evidence”. That’s anything greater than 50%. Between the risk of the verdict going against them, the legal costs and the possible jury award (which could be far more than $5M) there is no way an insurance company take this case to a verdict. The math will dictate that they settle.

How so? 

 

It's a known complication of a procedure. I doubt it's the first intercostal block this team doc has done. In fact, he's still employed by the team, and will likely do Herbert's next week lol.

 

TT is alleging he was never made aware of the risks or complications. If his signature is on a consent form that spells out risks and complications, he's lying.

 

Why have they not settled if there's no way they take it to verdict?  Did you read the article?

 

"The trial originally was scheduled for November, but both sides agreed to move it to April because of the current NFL season. The issue has been percolating since the lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court in May 2021 for an injury that occurred almost exactly two years ago Sunday."

Edited September 19, 2022 by FireChans

[BarleyNY]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

How so? 

 

It's a known complication of a procedure. I doubt it's the first intercostal block this team doc has done. In fact, he's still employed by the team, and will likely do Herbert's next week lol.

 

TT is alleging he was never made aware of the risks or complications. If his signature is on a consent form that spells out risks and complications, he's lying.

 

Why have they not settled if there's no way they take it to verdict?  Did you read the article?

 

"The trial originally was scheduled for November, but both sides agreed to move it to April because of the current NFL season. The issue has been percolating since the lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court in May 2021 for an injury that occurred almost exactly two years ago Sunday."

Because sometimes bad outcomes are not due to a medical practitioner failing to meet the expected standard of care. And sometimes they are. A disclosure of a possible complication does not mean that a doctor’s performance does not impact whether or not that complication occurs or whether they are responsible for it.

 

With this specific procedure it’s obvious how a mistakes by a physician would lead to a punctured lung. Sometimes that same complication might be unavoidable, but the performance of the doctor would definitely have a bearing on it. The legal burden of proof is anything over a 50% chance that the doctor’s performance cause this complication. 
 

Settlements usually occur in the 11th hour so there’s no surprise that there has not been one yet. I don’t have a dog in this fight. I just know how these cases go due to being in the insurance industry. I’m just trying to explain what almost always happens. 

[Beerball]

18 hours ago, FireChans said:

Because 1% is not zero, and a bad outcome does not equal negligence?

If it was zero you wouldn't have a thread, would you?

 

He's due his.