Doctors PI Program
From the Desk of:
Jason Pergolizzi, Esq.
Since I have used started working with Dr. Studin and the doctors he has trained, my cases have become much easier to manage and win. The reports are laid out in a manner that allows me to compose my bill of particulars seamlessly and directly off the narrative and I am able to understand every facet of the case.
The biggest issue I have is being able to understand the relationship between causality, bodily injury and persistent functional loss, which is critical to the courts and the value of the case. Although I do not expect a doctor to “make my case,” I appreciate a doctor who understands, from an ethical perspective, how to present on paper, in a concise manner, what the courts need to enable me to prevail on my cases. I also no longer have to worry about the doctor’s work being admitted into evidence because of credentials. The doctors I have been working with understand the admissibility issues and the importance of credentials in helping me prevail in my cases.
Doctors do not understand, as rule, the value of formal training in MRI interpretation and accident reconstruction. The MRI course is easily understood, but the accident reconstruction credential may allow me to get causality into evidence in a manner not previously considered, especially if my opponent uses an accident reconstruction specialist. We now have a doctor with accident reconstruction credentials and that trumps an accident reconstruction specialist who is not a doctor.
To the courts, it is about perception and the perception of the doctor with those credentials is huge. In fact, it is one of the most significant additions to doctor's credentials I have seen in years. This could gives me a decided advantage in court and one that should equate to significantly higher settlements in the years to come until my opponents demand that their doctors get the same credentials.
This is what “I seek” in doctors when I have the opportunity to work with them; knowledge, credentials and the ability to articulate findings on paper in the way that your program teaches. In my world that is all that matters.
John Tierney, Esq.
The last few times I have been in court with Dr. Studin, we have been against radiologists, neurologists and orthopedists and each time we have prevailed using the chiropractor. The reason is simple; it’s not about the degree, but the credentials behind the degree and I am happy to say that “my chiropractor” had the credentials to allow us to prevail. In each case, the courts were pleased with the credentials of the chiropractor allowing us to admit testimony on MRI, electrodiagnostics and accident issues. The latter, accident issues, is what we trumped the other medical specialists in, as there are very few, if any, doctors who are credentialed in accident reconstruction In the last case, we were able to admit Dr. Studin’s report because he was an expert and not a treating doctor, as those are the rules of our state, but it didn’t matter, as his knowledge base matched his credentials and he was able to teach the jury, in a very basic manner, about my client’s bodily injuries.
I have now worked with Dr. Studin for over 15 years and since the onset of our relationship, our practice has reaped the benefits financially in an honest and ethical manner. One of the items I appreciate most is when I am told there are no findings and he advises me to dismiss the case. That alone has insulated our practice from spending countless hours and money on non-fruitful cases, even though we work diligently to find some way to serve our clients.
Martin Pollack, Esq.
I prevail on my cases for two reasons. First, my clients have the findings and second and most importantly, I have the knowledge to understand those findings so I can argue and prevail with that knowledge. In years past, I would often argue blindly or with 5 minutes of “Internet knowledge.” I no longer have to take that course.
Over the past few years, I have had a relationship with an expert in trauma who has availed himself and has taught me and my staff the “medical” in medical-legal. That knowledge, over the last few years, has allowed me to prevail in many cases I previously would have struggled with. In addition, I now also have a specialist at my fingertips to dial and talk to anytime. Personal injury has become a more difficult place in the courts as the years progress and this is this type of relationship that allows me to compete at a higher level and prevail when the client’s findings allow.
In the last few months, I have become aware of the credential of accident reconstruction for doctors. I am very anxious to get a case allowing me to utilize that credential, as in the past this has been a difficult hurdle for me to overcome when my adversary brings in his expert. Now I have a doctor, who in addition has the credential. This is a “breakthrough” in what my needs have and will be. I could get into the reporting aspect and knowledge of the expert, but those things should be a given, although with most doctors as experts, they historically haven’t been.