Medical Malpractice vs. Personal Injury: Know the Difference

April 10, 2024

Legal proceedings involving physical or psychological damage often fall under the categories of medical malpractice and personal injury. While they may seem similar, there are crucial distinctions that can significantly impact the legal process, outcomes, and avenues for compensation. Whether you're a legal practitioner specializing in medical litigation or an individual navigating their rights in the aftermath of an injury, understanding these differences is paramount. 


A Brief Overview

Medical malpractice encompasses situations where a healthcare professional violates the standard of care, leading to patient harm. It is a subset of personal injury law but is highly specific to healthcare contexts.


On the other hand, personal injury law covers any wrong or damage done to another person, their property, rights, or reputation. Personal injury cases can stem from car accidents, workplace accidents, assault claims, and more.


Medical Malpractice

Examining medical malpractice means focusing on the highly intricate and sensitive relations between patients and healthcare providers.


The Definition and Examples

Medical malpractice occurs when a healthcare provider deviates from the standard of care, causing injury or death to the patient. Examples include misdiagnosis, improper treatment, and health management leading to pain and suffering or death.


Legal Implications and Proving Elements

To prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff must demonstrate:


  1. The existence of a doctor-patient relationship
  2. Negligence in the standard of care
  3. Causation that the negligence caused the injury
  4. Provability that the injury led to specific damages


Medical Malpractice Cases and Outcomes

Due to the complexity and high stakes involved in medical malpractice cases, they often result in settlements or court victories that involve substantial compensations. They can cause emotional distress but are necessary to hold healthcare providers accountable.


Personal Injury

Personal injury law covers a wide spectrum of cases, each with its unique set of circumstances and dynamics.


The Definition and Examples

Personal injury law is concerned with civil cases arising from allegations of injuries, physical or psychological, as a result of the negligent actions of another person, company, government entity, or any other entity.


Types of Personal Injury Cases

Common types of personal injury cases include:


  • Auto Collision (Including motor vehicle accidents or truck accidents)
  • Slip and fall incidents
  • Workplace Injuries
  • And so on


Compensation and Legal Process

The goal of a personal injury case is to provide the injured party with compensation to cover their losses from the responsible party, which may include medical bills and lost wages. The legal process can culminate in a settlement, trial, or alternative dispute resolution.


Key Differences

Understanding the nuanced distinctions is vital for anyone involved in these types of cases.


Legal Duty and Requirements

Medical malpractice cases require much stricter elements to be proven, such as the breach of a professional duty of care. Personal injury cases, while typically less stringent, still demand proof of negligent conduct or intent that led to injury.


Negligence vs. Intentional Harm

A critical difference lies in the requirement for intent. In personal injury cases, the defendant's negligence is the primary factor, whereas in medical malpractice, the focus is on professional negligence or reckless conduct leading to injury.


Case Examples for Clarity

To illustrate the differences, consider these cases:


  • A car accident caused by a driver running a red light typically falls under the umbrella of personal injury law due to the driver's negligence.
  • A surgeon amputating the wrong limb - this  is a clear example of medical malpractice, as it involves a healthcare professional's failure to meet the standard of care.


Damages in Personal Injury Claims

When it comes to an injury claim, the damages you can receive are typically categorized into compensatory and punitive damages, each with its purpose and criteria.


Compensatory Damages

These damages are intended to be monetary damages for the injured party for the loss or injury suffered. They can be further divided into:


  • Economic Damages: Covering tangible losses such as medical expenses, lost wages, property damage, and future earnings loss.
  • Non-Economic Damages: Addressing intangible losses like pain and suffering, emotional trauma loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of consortium.


Punitive Damages

While less common, punitive damages may be awarded in cases where the defendant’s actions were particularly reckless or egregious. These are not meant to compensate the victim but rather to punish the defendant and deter similar conduct in the future.


Understanding the types of damages available in a personal injury claim is essential for achieving a fair and comprehensive settlement or judgment.


Why You Should Hire a Personal Injury Lawyer

Hiring an experienced personal injury attorney for a personal injury lawsuit is crucial when navigating the complexities of filing a claim and seeking justified financial compensation for injuries suffered due to someone else's negligence.


These legal professionals bring a wealth of knowledge and experience, ensuring that your rights are protected throughout the entire legal process. A personal injury lawyer will meticulously evaluate the specifics of your case, determine the full extent of your damages, and advocate on your behalf, aiming to secure the maximum compensation possible.


Conclusion

Being aware of whether a situation constitutes medical malpractice or is a personal injury matter can significantly alter the course of legal action. This knowledge is invaluable for personal injury victims to understand their legal rights and for legal professionals to provide adequate counsel.



Trust in expert counsel. If you or someone you know has been injured consider reaching out to The Jason J. Joy & Associates law firm to guide you through the complexities of these areas of law and ensure that justice is served appropriately and effectively.



Contact Us

By submitting this form you agree to receive text messages.

By Rebecca Rivera December 9, 2025
As reported in the Washington Post December 5th, 2025 by Amudalat Ajasa A prominent scientific journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, has retracted a widely cited 2000 study that previously concluded the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, posed no cancer risk to humans. The retraction was initiated after evidence emerged suggesting the study was heavily influenced by the herbicide's seller, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer), in an apparent effort to disguise potential health risks. Specific concerns cited by the journal include the strong possibility that Monsanto employees contributed to the writing without proper acknowledgment, that the authors may have received undisclosed payments from the company , and that the findings were based solely on unpublished Monsanto studies. This misconduct, discovered through internal company emails during federal litigation, is significant because the faulty research served as a bedrock for regulatory decisions regarding glyphosate for decades. Summary of Alleged Faulty Study and Monsanto's Influence The Study and Its Conclusion: The retracted paper, published in 2000, was a "bedrock study" that concluded: "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans." The Retraction: The scientific journal retracted the study due to a loss of confidence in its results and conclusions, citing the need to "maintain the integrity of the journal." Evidence of Undisclosed Influence: The co-editor in chief cited evidence suggesting that Monsanto employees "may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co authors." Undisclosed Payments: The retraction also noted that the study's authors may have been paid by Monsanto without disclosing it . Basis of Findings: The journal stated that the study's findings about cancer risk were "solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto." Discovery of Influence: Monsanto's influence over the study was reportedly discovered through internal emails released during federal litigation against the company in 2017. Impact: The study "had a significant impact on regulatory decision-making regarding glyphosate and Roundup for decades," and was one of the most-cited papers on glyphosate safety, underpinning federal regulations for the pesticide. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) even cited it in its 2016 review of glyphosate. Context and Aftermath Bayer's Defense: Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) defended the chemical's safety and argued that Monsanto's involvement was appropriately cited in the acknowledgments, stating that glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide and that the "vast majority of published studies on glyphosate had no Monsanto involvement." Regulatory Stance: The EPA stated the retraction would not affect its current stance —which is that glyphosate is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—because the agency does not directly rely on review articles like this one, but uses them to find other relevant individual studies. Litigation: Bayer has spent approximately $10 billion to settle lawsuits arguing the company did not warn customers about the negative health impacts of using Roundup. Read the full article in the Washington Post
By Rebecca Rivera November 14, 2025
In this series premiere episode, Founder & President of SOSCSA, Child Sexual Abuse Survivor & BSA Bankruptcy Claimant, Curtis Garrison interviews attorney Jason J Joy for an update on the BSA bankruptcy and discussing childhood abuse litigation for which Jason is an outspoken and experienced advocate. Jason's firm is actively litigating cases for many clients his law firm represents. This podcast is recommended for clients already represented, and for those who are still contemplating coming forward to establish a claim. Topics covered in this episode: Recent BSA Bankruptcy Trust report Lajun Claimants (Guam) v. Boy Scouts of America and their recent Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court The 1.5% initial payment, possible second payment time / total percentage Future Claims, BSA Councils, BSA Charters (churches, schools, etc) which there are over 100,000 entities possibly getting free of liability Mixed Claims explained We did not vote for this plan, they promised we would be paid in “Paid in Full” Plans to file an Amicus Brief Statute of Limitations 
By Rebecca Rivera November 6, 2025
The Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy case, involving tens of thousands of survivors of childhood sexual abuse, is among the largest and most contentious mass tort proceedings in U.S. history. In this podcast, Attorney Jason Joy breaks down the latest ruling from the Third Circuit Court, which leaves many survivors of childhood sexual abuse with drastically underfunded compensation.