If you're the defendant in a medical malpractice trial, it might be a good idea to refrain from expressing unflattering views about the jury on your blog while the trial is in progress. But Dr. Robert Lindeman, who was blogging anonymously on drfleablog as "Flea," decided to forge ahead and give his blunt and detailed assessments of the plaintiff, the plaintiff's attorney, and the jury on his blog, and it was only a matter of time before he was unmasked. According to this Boston Globe story, opposing counsel asked Dr. Lindeman while he was on the stand, "Are you Flea?" Dr. Lindeman admitted that "Flea" was his blogging persona, and the next day, the case settled for what was characterized as a "substantial" sum.
The implications of this story? Well, for starters, litigators may need to start asking their clients whether they blog at the very beginning of an engagement. If the answer is yes, attorneys would be well-advised to set some ground rules for their clients on what they can reveal about the litigation in which they are involved. Attorneys should also examine clients' blog content to ascertain whether any of the existing posts could have a negative impact on litigation strategy.
If you're looking for drfleablog, don't bother. It's been taken down, and there aren't any juicy bits from the trial on the archived pages on the Wayback Machine.
Update: New York Personal Injury Law Blog has some excellent and extensive posts on this topic, including some posts that were written before Lindeman's identity was revealed. Scroll through the posts tagged "medical malpractice" to read Eric Turkewitz's take on this story and to read cached versions of drfleablog.
Comments