Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
You've sued a doctor in a medical malpractice case here in New York and now I'm ready to
put the doctor on the witness stand. The mere fact that I called this witness to the stand
does that mean I am vouching for his credibility? Would you like to learn the answer? Come join
me as I share with you this great information. Hi. I'm Gerry Oginski. I'm a New York medical
malpractice and personal injury trial attorney practicing law here in the state of New York.
Typically, when I put a witness on the stand I am inherently telling the jury that I am
vouching for this witness' credibility. That means that I can typically only ask open ended
questions (known as a direct examination). I can't ask leading questions. And typically
when I put a witness on the stand to support our claim and our case, I'm doing it because
I'm basically telling a jury, listen, this witness will give testimony that's favorable
to our side and I'm vouching for this witness' credibility. On the other hand, there are
many times in a medical malpractice case where I will have to call the doctor who you are
sued (known as the defendant) on to the witness stand. Now something interesting happens here.
What happens is that because he is now unfavorable he is now antagonistic to our claims, he has
a different position and a different agenda now something unusual happens. I'm no longer
vouching for his credibility. Instead what is happening is that I'm required to call
this particular witness this doctor to the witness stand because I need him to establish
a number of things in our case. I need him to establish what the standard of care is.
I need him to go through and explain to the jury what he did and why for the injured victim.
And now I have the opportunity that even though I have called this witness to stand I no longer
have to ask him just open ended questions. Doctor, tell us what you did. Instead, I'm
permitted in New York to ask leading questions. And this allows me (1) to control the witness
and (2) to get information that I specifically want to get in front of the jury. Now obviously
when I'm done questioning this particular doctor, his attorney (the defense lawyer)
will have an opportunity to conduct what's known as a direct examination. Asking the
doctor open ended questions and that will give the doctor an opportunity to go ahead
and explain. But when I call the doctor to the witness stand I am not vouching for his
credibility. Instead I am showing to the jury that this witness is antagonistic, this witness
is sort of a hostile witness to our claims. And now I am permitted to ask the witness
cross-examining type questions that require either yes, no or I don't know or I don't
remember. And this way, the jury will then have an opportunity to truly judge whether
or not this witness' testimony is credible. So why do I share this great information with
you? I share it with you just to give you an insight and an understanding into what
goes on in the trial process here in the state of New York in a medical malpractice case.
You know, I recognize that chances are you have questions or concerns of your own about
your own particular matter. Well what I encourage you to do if you have legal questions is pick
up the phone and call me. I can answer your legal questions. I do this every single day
and I welcome your call. You can reach me at 516-487-8207 or by email at Gerry@Oginski-law.com.
Well that's it for today's quick video. I'm Gerry Oginski, here in New York. Have a wonderful
day!