Depositions are an integral part to almost every personal injury case. Testimony from the plaintiff, witnesses, and treating physicians are commonly used to establish not only the facts of the case, but also the extent of suffered damages. When taking a deposition on behalf of an injured victim, there are several questions a Phoenix personal injury lawyer should ask; however, there are three critical inquiries that should not be missed.
Question #1: “Doctor, can you describe the injuries that occurred to my client, Mr. Smith”
The purpose of question is to get doctor to describe the injuries in complete and specific detail. This information can be crucially important to building a case for proper damages compensation. Using any available medical records as a guide or reference point can help a treating physician remark more precisely on the injuries of the plaintiff.
Question #2: “Doctor, what caused those injuries?”
For a case to be a success, it’s almost always important for the jury to understand the cause of the injury (i.e., motorcycle or car accident). Request that the treating physician describe the biomechanics of how the subject injury occurred. Additionally, the doctor should go through treatment requirements for the injury. Again, detailed descriptions can be very important.
Question #3: “Doctor, are there any permanent injuries?”
It is also very important for almost any jury to understand whether or not the subject injuries will last forever to help determine the level of compensation due to the plaintiff. If the injury is permanent, then life expectancy must be assessed. The goal here is to maximize the jury’s understanding of extent of injuries.
It’s important to remember that each state differs in what testimony is needed and permissible from the treating doctor; but in general, asking these 3 basic questions is a great start to any physician deposition. They can not only help bolster the facts of a case, but shed some light on the extent of the damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the defendant’s negligence.