I don't know what they did wrong. I didn't even read the entire article. I still think malpractice cases ought to be decided by a peer review process rather than a jury of so called ordinary people,as some of these cases are extremely complicated however I also see problems with this type of proceeding. Lawyers like Edwards can flash those big white teeth at jurors and get outrageous awards.
If you don't know what the lawsuit was about, why are starting a thread about it? Let me enlighten you. It was about an infant being treated in an emergency room and doctors using a breathing tube that didn't work properly. The child didn't get enough oxygen and now has brain damage among other issues. So what do you think the parents would rather have? Money, or a child who is not handicapped for life due to malpractice?
