Can lawyers hold doctors accountable for wasting our time?

I’m mad as hell, and I’m not ready any longer! These have been the feelings expressed by a lawyer colleague of mine, Franklin, after his physician saved him ready for over two hours. “I ought to ship him a invoice for my wasted time,” he stated.

I’m certain many people have heard this one earlier than. However I doubt anybody has ever despatched a invoice to a doctor for time misplaced sitting across the ready room. What would occur if, say, a lawyer tried it? Why not? The regulation is not any stranger to landmark iconic instances, equivalent to Miranda rights upon arrest or Donoghue v. Stevenson, the long-lasting negligence icebreaker case the place a producer of ginger beer was held liable to a pub buyer who discovered a decomposed snail in her opaque beverage. The British courts awarded her damages along with simply saying “Yech!”

I feel we might all prefer to see a lawyer bringing forth a lawsuit in opposition to a health care provider, with the decide’s determination wanting one thing like this:

Impatient J.:

That is an motion for damages by Melvin Alvin, lawyer, in opposition to Dr. Arthur Coopersmith, dermatologist. The plaintiff alleges that he visited the workplaces of the great physician to take care of a boil which sprung up on his neck. He says the appointment was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on the twenty third of June final, however that he was not seen by the physician till 12:45 p.m. He notes that the defendant physician met him for about 5 minutes, throughout which he prescribed some ointment. The plaintiff pleads that he mustn’t have been saved ready greater than two hours, for him “time is cash,” and accordingly, the subsequent day he despatched the physician a invoice for $1,000 representing two hours of his billable time.

I’ll word that on the graduation of this trial, the defendant requested that I recuse myself from listening to this case if I had ever been saved ready by a health care provider and didn’t prefer it. I denied the movement on the idea that though medical doctors have persistently wasted hours of my life maintaining me ready unnecessarily like an fool of their crowded disagreeable ready rooms, overcrowded with sufferers obsessive about their cellphones, it by no means actually bothered me. In spite of everything, I’m a decide of the regulation. I’m completely goal. Sure.

FACTS:

The great lawyer plaintiff Alvin, to whom I shall refer as Melvin, testified that he meant to spend the morning in query getting ready for a divorce trial. He anticipated to be seen as scheduled at 10:30 by the defendant physician Coopersmith, to whom I shall refer because the defendant. Melvin notes that he even known as the defendant’s workplace earlier than arriving to evaluate any attainable ready time and spoke to the receptionist, one Gladys, who stated, “The physician is busy seeing many sufferers. He’ll see you this morning. Ha ha! Most necessary, don’t neglect your medical health insurance data …”

ANALYSIS

Melvin argues a number of factors of regulation justifying his declare. His first level is that the defendant is chargeable for forcible confinement. True, the great lawyer might have picked up and left, however that boil on his neck was too irritating and he had no selection however to hold in there in that overcrowded disagreeable ready room till he was seen by the defendant, who was completely thoughtless of his sufferers’ time. I discover there was a transparent case of forcible confinement right here.

Melvin additionally argues that the defendant is chargeable for deliberately inflicting alarm and misery. He testified that round 10:54 he was getting agitated ready, and he requested Gladys to ask the defendant how for much longer he must wait earlier than being seen. He notes that Gladys replied, within the fashion of Charles Dickens’ Madame Defarge, “No person interrupts the physician. Ha ha.” She then went again to her knitting.

As well as, the poor plaintiff Melvin pleads legal responsibility in negligence. He claims that there was an obligation of care owing by the defendant physician to his sufferers to make them really feel good, not traumatized. He refers to some well-established case regulation noting that physicians have for hundreds of years systemically saved sufferers ready. He cites the long-lasting keep-waiting case going again to the times of Chaucer, The Man of Regulation v. the Physician, 31 C.C.C. (Court docket of Loopy Instances) p 113. This was an motion began by a lawyer, one William of Yorke, who throughout a pilgrimage to Canterbury got here down with a fever. He consulted his fellow pilgrim the physician, and he was saved ready for 5 hours earlier than being seen. The trial decide, one Lord Gerald, famous, “5 hours? That’s manner too lengthy to be seen and handled with leeches. The great lawyer mustn’t have needed to wait greater than minutes earlier than seeing a leach. A plague on the defendant.”

One other case cited was Robin of Loxley v. Sherwood Forest and Associates, 29 N.N.R. (Not Nottingham Reviews) p 311, the place the plaintiff efficiently sued a bunch of physicians for exhibiting up three hours late when making a home name to Robin Hood and his merry males. The decide, Little Arnold J., awarded Robin Hood a sum of 280 shillings, representing what he might have earned throughout this down time, stealing from the wealthy and giving to the poor.

This court docket finds Melvin had made out a case in opposition to the defendant on all of his arguments.

DAMAGES

The proof was that his declare for damages for time misplaced was clearly foreseeable. After ready about quarter-hour, the plaintiff Melvin instructed Gladys, “Hey, my billable time is $500 per hour … simply letting you already know. I’ll be again in a few minutes after I get a cup of espresso from Starbucks. My meter is working.”

I discover this proof credible and foreseeable.

DISPOSITION

There can be judgment for the plaintiff as claimed, together with authorized prices. This award is to be paid forthwith. No ready.

I can’t say we will see a court docket determination like this for some time. We could have to attend a bit.

Marcel Strigberger, after 40-plus years of practising civil litigation within the Toronto space, closed his regulation workplace and determined to proceed his humor writing and talking passions. His newest e-book is First, Let’s Kill the Lawyer Jokes: An Legal professional’s Irreverent Critical Have a look at the Authorized Universe. Go to MarcelsHumour.com and observe him at @MarcelsHumour on X, previously often called Twitter.

This column displays the opinions of the writer and never essentially the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Affiliation.