An economic analysis of mandatory mediation and the disposition of medical malpractice claims
Abstract
The conventional tort litigation system for resolving medical malpractice claims is criticized as being slow, costly and unreliable. This paper uses claims data to analyze a tort reform process known as "mandatory mediation," which was designed to alleviate some of the problems arising in the litigation of malpractice cases. The trends in medical malpractice are examined to see how frequency and severity of claims filed have changed over time. Mediation outcomes, based on the parties, responses to the mediation evaluation, and claim disposition, based on the eventual outcome of the case, are analyzed. OLS and Probit estimates are used to identify characteristics that affect mediation awards, and the disputants' propensity to accept the mediation awards. The results show that injury severity and the type of injury being alleged are significant in determining awards and the propensity to accept awards. Few malpractice cases are resolved by mediation and the final settlement or trial awards are significantly different from the mediation awards. However, it appears that mediation provides an avenue whereby disputants are making informed decisions on whether to continue litigation. ^
Subject Area
Law|Economics, General|Economics, Theory|Health Sciences, General
Recommended Citation
Walter Olando Simmons,
"An economic analysis of mandatory mediation and the disposition of medical malpractice claims"
(January 1, 1994).
ETD Collection for Wayne State University.
Paper AAI9519962.
http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/dissertations/AAI9519962