$I Billion for Injured New Yorkers
Our Results
  • $30.1 Million NYC - Medical Malpractice Case
  • $15 Million Manhattan - Medical Malpractice Case
  • $3 Million Queens - Wrongful Death Case
  • $5.5 Million Bronx - Birth Injury Accident
  • $30.1 Million NYC - Medical Malpractice Case
  • $15 Million Manhattan - Medical Malpractice Case
  • $3 Million Queens - Wrongful Death Case
  • $5.5 Million Bronx - Birth Injury Accident
  • $7.75 Million NYC - Medical Malpractice Case
Rosenberg, Minc, Falkoff & Wolff, LLP
Experienced & Trusted Medical Malpractice Lawyers
Call today for a Free Consultation
Serving the greater NYC Area: Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx & Staten Island

Is Your Lawyer Vouching for Doctor's Credibility by Calling Him to the Stand

You have sued a doctor in a medical malpractice case in New York, and your lawyer is going to put the doctor on the witness stand at trial. The mere fact that your lawyer has called this witness to the stand, does it mean that your lawyer is vouching for this doctor's credibility?

Typical Scenario

Typically, when a lawyer puts a witness on the stand, he inherently is telling the jury that he is vouching for this witness's credibility. This means, the lawyer can typically ask only open-ended questions known as a direct examination, and he cannot ask any other type of questions. Secondly, when the lawyer is putting a witness on the stand to support his client's claim, he is basically telling the jury that this witness is favorable to his side, and he is vouching for the witness's credibility.

It is Different When the Defendant is the Witness

Nevertheless, many times, in a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff's lawyer will have to call the doctor to the stand, who is being sued. This means the defendant will be called to the witness stand. However, something interesting happens here. Since the defendant is unfavorable and antagonistic towards the plaintiff's claims, he will have a different position and a different agenda.

Something unusual happens, as the plaintiff's lawyer will not be vouching for this witness's credibility. Instead, the plaintiff's lawyer has to call this particular witness, this doctor, to the witness stand, because he needs to establish a number of things to the case. The plaintiff's lawyer has to establish, by questioning this witness:

· What is the expected standard of care for the particular procedure

· What did the doctor do and why

Now, even though the plaintiff's lawyer has called this doctor to the stand, he no longer has to ask this witness open-ended questions. The lawyer need not ask questions like "Doctor, tell us what you did". Instead, the lawyer can ask leading questions, which will enable him to control the witness, and he can derive information that he specifically wants the jury to hear.

Obviously, the defense attorney will have the opportunity to question his client, who is the doctor, and conduct direct examination, asking open-ended questions. This will give the doctor, the opportunity to explain his side of the story in detail.

However, when the plaintiff's lawyer calls the doctor to the witness stand, he is not vouching for his credibility. Instead, he is showing to the jury that this witness is antagonistic, and is a sort of hostile witness to his client's claim. The lawyer is therefore permitted to ask this witness, cross-examining type of questions, which require a yes, no, or I don't know or remember, type of answers. This way, the jury will have the opportunity to judge whether this witness's testimony is truly credible.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information

Learn About Medical Malpractice Cases in NYC

Watch all videos »

Listen to our clients

Watch all videos »

Case of the month

$7,750,000 Recovery Due to Negligent Care in NYC Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Our client, a 5-year-old patient, receives almost $8 million in compensation from an NYC hospital in a medical malpractice claim won by Rosenberg, Minc, Falkoff & Wolf. Representing the injured child with his team of legal and medical experts, Daniel Minc said, "It was great day for the family."

The case involved negligent care on the part of the hospital pediatric intensive care unit for failing to observe bleeding from a simple biopsy wound which caused neurological damage.

Medical Malpractice Blog

$25 million verdict against New York Methodist Hospital
When a child is born, parents expect the doctor, nurses and other staff to provide care that is up to the...
Read This Malpractice Post

Experienced & Trusted medical malpractice lawyers

  • Top Lawyers 2016
  • Litigator Awards
  • Verdicts and Settlement Hall of Fame
  • BBB Accredited Business | A+
  • Avvo Rating 10.0 Superb | Top Attorney Medical Malpractice
  • Rated By Super Lawyers | Daniel C. Minc | 5 years
Call 1-866-516-5887 or email us to set up your free, confidential consultation. Our experience can make a difference for you.

Office Locations - Call today to schedule a consultation 1-866-516-5887

16 Court Street
Brooklyn, NY 11241

Brooklyn Law Office

3101 Broadway
Astoria, NY 11106

Astoria Law Office

8900 Sutphin Blvd
Suite 501
Queens, NY 11435

Queens Law Office

9201 4th Ave
Brooklyn, NY 11209

Brooklyn Law Office

Firm News

Robert H. Wolff Named President
Firm Attorney, Robert H. Wolff is now the president of the New York City Bronx County Bar Association
About This Attorney

Back to Top