Phase 1Initial Case Review
- Map all phases of care: initial presentation, diagnosis, treatment, discharge, and follow-up.Each phase has a distinct standard of care and a distinct pool of potential defendants. Most attorneys focus on one.
- Identify every clinician who touched the patient - not just the attending physician.Residents, APPs, nurses, consulting specialists, radiologists who read imaging. Each has a defined scope and potential liability exposure.
- Determine whether the patient was seen by an APP (NP/PA) versus an attending physician.Review collaborative practice agreements and supervision requirements. Co-signatures completed days later without the attending having seen the patient imply review that may not have occurred.
- Flag all time gaps in care - particularly around shift changes, weekends, and consultant notifications.
- Review referral and transfer documentation for any delays or miscommunication.A flawed referral or delayed transfer can mean the wrong level of care for hours or days.
- Check for any handoff failures between providers, units, or facilities.Mischaracterization of the patient at handoff anchors every subsequent provider assessment.
- Identify whether critical test results were communicated in a timely manner.Lab and imaging results sitting unreviewed for hours or days is a common and provable breach.
· · ·
Phase 2Discovery - What to Request
- EMR audit trail - not just the chart.The audit trail shows the exact timestamp of when each entry was created vs. when the event occurred. Back-charted documentation appears here and nowhere else.
- Nursing assignment sheets for the shift(s) in question.Shows actual patient load per nurse. Compare to professional standards for the unit type. Unsafe ratios are the foundation of a corporate negligence theory.
- Staffing matrix including any variance requests filed by charge nurse or supervisor.Variance requests show the hospital documented the shortage. That is the foundation of a corporate negligence theory.
- Patient portal release logs.Many systems release lab results directly to patients before physician review. A critical result may have reached the patient's phone before the physician saw it. Request portal release timestamps alongside physician review timestamps.
- Consultant call logs and response time records.Ask for every documented attempt to reach the consultant. Then ask what the hospital policy requires when a consultant fails to respond - and who else was notified.
- Transfer center call logs - every call, every refusal, every reason given.
- Prior incident reports on the same unit involving staffing or similar errors.Pattern evidence for corporate negligence. The hospital knew and chose not to act.
- Downtime procedure logs if EMR was slow or unavailable during the relevant period.
- Credentialing files for APPs, residents, or any provider whose qualifications are in question.Specialty-specific training is not always required for credentialing. The hospital's privileging process may itself be a target.
- Policies and procedures relevant to the specific clinical situation.The hospital's own written standards define what they committed to do. Deviation from internal policy is powerful evidence.
Interrogatory worth adding: "Identify any Quality Improvement or peer review proceedings initiated in connection with this patient's care." The privilege fight is worth having.
· · ·
Phase 3Deposition - Questions They Are Not Prepared For
- "Did you agree with the consultant's recommendation?" To the attending:Forces them off the "I deferred to the specialist" defense. The treating physician has an independent duty of judgment.
- "How many patients were you responsible for at the exact moment you made this decision?" To the attending:
- "Were any staff on your shift working mandatory overtime?" To any provider:
- "When you documented 'patient resting comfortably,' did you physically enter the room at that time?" To the nurse:This phrase appears routinely in nursing notes for patients who were never assessed. Watch what happens when you ask it directly.
- "Show me every entry in this flowsheet where you documented vital signs manually versus pulled from a monitor." To the nurse:
- "How long after you were notified did you first see the patient in person?" To the specialist:
- "Does your hospital have a written policy defining response time requirements for your specialty?" To any physician:Many don't. The absence of a policy is itself evidence of a system failure.
- "What specialty-specific training did you complete before this position?" To the APP:
- "Then walk me through what your usual practice would have been." Follow-up to any "I don't remember":
· · ·
Phase 4Expert Selection
- Match the expert to the specific breach - not just to the general specialty.A diagnostic failure needs a different expert than a surgical complication or a nursing error. Match precisely.
- currently practicing clinically Verify the expert is - not retired or primarily academic.Defense will exploit anyone who left clinical practice more than 2-3 years ago as out of touch with current standards.
- specific specialty at issue. Confirm board certification in theA family medicine physician testifying in a cardiology case is a significant cross-examination vulnerability.
- less than 50% of their professional time. Verify testimony constitutesAbove 50% and the "hired gun" framing will define your expert's entire cross. Get this number before you commit.
- Budget for more than one expert if the case crosses multiple breach phases or specialties.A diagnostic delay plus a surgical error plus a nursing failure may require three separate experts. Plan for it at intake, not at trial.
· · ·
AlwaysQuestions for Every Case
- Was the patient physically examined - or only charted on?
- What was the nurse-to-patient ratio? Does it meet professional standards for this unit type?
- Were there any delays in diagnosis, treatment, or specialist involvement?
- Do documentation timestamps match the care timeline - or does the audit trail tell a different story?
- Did prior visit records or existing diagnoses create anchoring bias that shaped the workup?Labels like "frequent flyer," "drug-seeking," or "anxiety" in prior notes can anchor a provider's thinking and abbreviate the workup. Request all prior records.
- Was the patient at the appropriate facility and level of care for their condition?Wrong facility plus right diagnosis is a provable causation chain. Stroke centers, cardiac centers, trauma centers, and NICUs all have different capabilities.
- Who specifically owned the patient during transitions - between shifts, units, or levels of care?Transitions are where patients fall through the cracks. Clarify responsibility at every handoff.