Democrats hope to press the "affordability" issue in this year's midterm election season, but there'…
CFIF on X CFIF on YouTube
Inflation: Comparing Trump and Biden...

Democrats hope to press the "affordability" issue in this year's midterm election season, but there's one potentially glaring problem for them, as illustrated by our friends at Unleash Prosperity...

[caption id="" align="alignleft" width="668"] Biden Versus Trump on Inflation[/caption]

 …[more]

August 17, 2026 • 04:40 PM
Home Jester's Courtroom High Standard of Care Expected from Lawyers as Well as Doctors
High Standard of Care Expected from Lawyers as Well as Doctors Print
Thursday, April 29 2010

A recent Virginia Supreme Court ruling upheld sanctions imposed by the state bar against a plaintiff’s lawyer who filed a medical liability lawsuit against the wrong physician. 

The lawsuit began when attorney Michael P. Weatherbee filed a liability action on behalf of his client alleging that ob-gyn Ward P. Vaughan, M.D. and others had been negligent in their treatment of Broyles.  As it turns out, Weatherbee might not have done enough homework to make sure he had the right Vaughan listed as a defendant.

According to news reports, there were 15 physicians with the same last name listed on the Virginia Board of Medicine’s website, three of whom practiced obstetrics.  Two of them were women who practiced outside of Virginia, so Weatherbee assumed the third was the co-defendant.  The problem for Weatherbee is that this Dr. Vaughan was not involved in the surgery at issue.  In fact, this Dr. Vaughan didn’t even have privileges at the hospital when the procedure was performed there. 

Eventually, Dr. Vaughan was successful in getting himself dismissed from the case, but not before he had to hire an attorney to help him.  He then filed a complaint against Weatherbee with the Virginia State Bar, which found that Weatherbee failed to independently verify Dr. Vaughan’s involvement.

Weatherbee challenged the state bar’s ruling, first before a three-judge panel of the Arlington County Circuit Court, and then on appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court, which unanimously upheld the lower court’s finding of liability for filing a non-meritorious claim.  More particularly, the court took issue with the fact that Weatherbee did not take “simple” steps to adequately research Dr. Vaughan’s involvement.  The court also noted that the lawsuit had a “deleterious impact” on Dr. Vaughan’s practice after local radio and television stations reported the lawsuit and he lost patients.

"The record demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that Weatherbee's action against Dr. Vaughan was frivolous because it had no basis in law or fact," Chief Justice Leroy R. Hassell Sr. wrote.

The underlying medical liability action ultimately was settled.

—Source:  American Medical News (AMA Publication)

Notable Quote   
 
"The U.S. Supreme Court will kick off its 2026 term next week with what will be one of its biggest cases of the year. And according to several legal specialists, there's much more to the dispute than meets the eye.The case in question is Suncor v. Boulder, which deals with the lawfare that Boulder, Colorado, launched against Suncor Energy companies and the Exxon Mobil Corporation. The city is seeking…[more]
 
 
— Shawn Fleetwood, Teh Federalist
 
Liberty Poll   

Based on the meteoric development of AI, do you believe that your job is going to be threatened or enhanced?