MDVIP, a prominent concierge medicine company, faces two major lawsuits and numerous individual claims raising concerns about malpractice, competition, and marketing practices. While the company denies wrongdoing, these legal challenges cast a shadow on the industry and prompt careful consideration before joining such practices.
Detailed Breakdown:
- Beber v. MDVIP (2013):
- Claim: Misdiagnosed leg infection led to patient’s death, with MDVIP liable for doctor’s negligence and deceptive marketing.
- Outcome: Jury awarded $8.5 million in 2015, but overturned on appeal in 2017.
- SignatureMD v. MDVIP (2014):
- Claim: MDVIP’s dominant market position stifles competition in the concierge medicine sector.
- Status: Ongoing lawsuit awaiting resolution.
- Additional Lawsuits: Individual claims against MDVIP for malpractice, breach of contract, and fraud.
- MDVIP’s Response: Denial of all wrongdoing in all lawsuits.
Considerations for Potential Concierge Medicine Patients:
- Lack of Government Regulation: Research the practice thoroughly before committing.
- Additional Fees: Expect monthly/annual fees on top of medical service costs.
- Smaller Patient Panels: Easier access to doctors due to fewer patients.
- Potential Additional Services: Same-day appointments, house calls, etc.
Weighing the Pros and Cons: Carefully evaluate the benefits and drawbacks before joining a concierge medicine practice, like MDVIP. Scrutinize contracts before signing.
Complete Date | Case | Citation | Court | Short Summary |
---|---|---|---|---|
2013 | Beber v. MDVIP | (Appealed) | U.S. District Court (Specific District Unclear) | Misdiagnosed infection, malpractice claim & marketing concerns. $8.5M awarded, then overturned. |
2014 | SignatureMD v. MDVIP | (Pending) | U.S. District Court (Specific District Unclear) | Antitrust claim: Stifling competition in concierge medicine market. |
2013-Present | Individual Lawsuits | (Various) | Various Courts | Medical malpractice, breach of contract, fraud claims against MDVIP. |
Remember: This information is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.