The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas is signaling a shift in how medical malpractice cases are managed, with aggressive trial scheduling becoming the new norm. This approach, aimed at keeping up with a surge in filings, has created a stark divide in how the legal community is reacting—particularly between the plaintiffs and defense bars.
Anapol Weiss shareholder Kila Baldwin recently commented on the situation in The Legal Intelligencer, pointing out what she sees as a fundamental tension. “The plaintiffs' bar has been happy with the court’s aggressive trial scheduling because it means their cases are resolving,” Baldwin said. “The defense bar is unhappy about it because they’d rather the cases sit. ... They’re busy because of it, and I think they’d rather push stuff out further.”
The defense bar, according to Baldwin, is feeling the strain of overlapping trial dates and back-to-back trials. This challenge is compounded by the limited number of experienced medical malpractice defense attorneys available to handle these high-stakes cases. Despite the growing workload, Baldwin noted that hospitals have yet to expand their pool of defense counsel. Instead, defense attorneys may need to rely more heavily on their associates to meet the demands of the current system.
As the court prepares to increase the number of trials scheduled each week in 2025, the defense bar faces a critical juncture: adapt to the heightened pace or risk falling behind. Meanwhile, plaintiffs firms like Anapol Weiss are embracing the court’s efforts to keep cases moving efficiently.
To read the full article in The Legal Intelligencer, click here.