site banner
Lazuli  1mo ago (text post)   426 thread views

Weekly NFL Thread: Week 4

Let's chat about the National Football League. This week's schedule (all times Eastern):

Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Cincinnati Bengals @ Carolina Panthers
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Denver Broncos @ New York Jets
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Jacksonville Jaguars @ Houston Texans
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Minnesota Vikings @ Green Bay Packers
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM New Orleans Saints @ Atlanta Falcons
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Philadelphia Eagles @ Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Pittsburgh Steelers @ Indianapolis Colts
Sun 2024-09-29 1:00PM Los Angeles Rams @ Chicago Bears
Sun 2024-09-29 4:05PM New England Patriots @ San Francisco 49ers
Sun 2024-09-29 4:05PM Washington Commanders @ Arizona Cardinals
Sun 2024-09-29 4:25PM Cleveland Browns @ Las Vegas Raiders
Sun 2024-09-29 4:25PM Kansas City Chiefs @ Los Angeles Chargers
Sun 2024-09-29 8:20PM Buffalo Bills @ Baltimore Ravens
Mon 2024-09-30 7:30PM Tennessee Titans @ Miami Dolphins
Mon 2024-09-30 8:15PM Seattle Seahawks @ Detroit Lions
-1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Court opinion:

  • A professional football player who makes 2 M$/a (Christopher Maragos of the Philadelphia Eagles, in 2016 "the highest-paid special-teams player in the NFL") experiences a knee injury (the MRI appears to show complete tear of one ligament, partial tear of another ligament, and tear of a meniscus root). He gets a surgery from an orthopedist (who reconstructs the completely-torn ligament, but considers the partially-torn ligament "stable" and amenable to natural healing, and finds the meniscus root not torn at all) and starts the process of rehabilitation.

  • After more than a year of ineffective rehabilitation and continuing pain, the player, frustrated by his knee's lack of recovery, gets a second opinion from a different orthopedist. The second orthopedist informs him that the first orthopedist should have conducted a second surgery (to fix the meniscus root, which in fact was torn and has been getting even worse over time), and the first orthopedist's failure to do so has caused the player's knee to degrade to the status of career-ending injury.

  • The player sues the first orthopedist. The jury finds the orthopedist liable and awards 44 M$ of damages. The appeals panel affirms (in year 2024, seven years after the injury and five years after the lawsuit was filed).

I assume that’s more than the doctor’s malpractice insurance?

This Meddit thread talks about some of the considerations.

https://old.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/113g4tp/former_philadelphia_eagles_captain_chris_maragos/

Two specific things to note:

-Jury trials in malpractice cases are almost always crapshoots, really isn't any relation to if someone did anything wrong and the verdict (both for and against doctors). It's incredibly stupid and you very frequently see expert witnesses saying things that should get licenses tossed.

-It's an increasing problem where doctors don't want to care for professional athletes because of risks like this.

The opinion doesn't mention.

As a lawyer who litigates in Pennsylvania, that seems about right. I'm honestly surprised that anyone litigates anywhere in the state other than Philadelphia, since they tend to award the biggest verdicts, and I've seen comparable awards tlgo to plaintiffs who couldn't claim nearly the same level of economic damages . I can't find any info on the appellate ruling that isn't pay walled, but I doubt there were any good grounds for appeal. I'm not sure what you're angle is here.

I'm not sure what your angle is here.

I just thought people in the football thread might find this football-related court opinion interesting.

I did!

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats