Fifty-odd years ago, the term “family doctor” described not only a type of medical practice common in small communities across the U.S. but also hinted at the tight-knit relationships between those physicians, who often still made house calls, and their patients.
Trust ran deep. Medical malpractice claims were comparatively rare, and plaintiffs’ verdicts were rarer still. What juror wanted to alienate the only person for miles around who could treat their child’s tonsillitis, then bump into them in church, at the local grocery store or on the golf course and face a doctor’s scorn based on a verdict that included a finding of negligence which caused harm?
That backdrop made lawyers reluctant to take on such cases, especially in Alabama, where Shay Samples and Leon Ashford were beginning their law careers.
“It was very difficult for us to go into a small county, file a lawsuit against the local equivalent of TV’s ‘Marcus Welby, M.D.’, and win a verdict against him when half the jury was going to know him,” says Ashford, who’s now the managing partner of Hare Wynn, a plaintiffs’ firm in Birmingham that specializes in medical malpractice cases.
“Welby,” an ABC drama premiering in 1969, focused on a silver-haired California physician who made house calls; his “dad vibe” was a world away from the earthier appeal McDreamy or McSteamy brought to the hospital-based “Grey’s Anatomy” decades later.
The change in televised depictions of medicine in between the two shows, in many ways, mirrors the changes in the American public’s experience with healthcare providers.
“Down here in the South, doctors and nurses have always been put on a pedestal, and that has now crumbled a bit,” explained Samples, a medical malpractice lawyer who joined Hare Wynn in the 1990s. “There has been a loss of trust in the doctor-patient relationship, which is not as personal and as intimate as it used to be.” This shift in juror perception of doctors has definitely not simplified the decision about which medical malpractice cases meet their strict criteria for litigation. These lawsuits remain notoriously complex, often involving treatments, science, complications and terminology with which jurors are unfamiliar, touching on painful events from death to severe injury and loss of mental and physical capabilities. Ashford, Samples and the Hare Wynn team focus not only on obtaining justice for clients suffering from poor care but also on making the healthcare system safer and more reliable for future patients.
From Football Field to Courtroom
Among their recent achievements are a jury verdict for $6M in 2024 for the family of Anne Davis, who died when an undiagnosed infection following gall bladder surgery led to sepsis. They also negotiated a settlement that provided lifelong care for Kathryn and Lane Hagan’s daughter, Libby, who received 100 times the prescribed dosage of insulin while in a hospital’s neonatal intensive care unit, sustaining brain damage and debilitating disabilities.
“We’re most often the last hope that these clients have,” Samples explained. “To handle these cases correctly, you have to invest the time and effort and money to do right by the clients. And we do that; we make that commitment.”
Lawdragon: The two of you have worked together for a long time. Tell us what attracted you to the law and how you found your way to Hare Wynn.
Leon Ashford: Two law partners and I had started a small firm in the same building as Hare Wynn. We were on an adjacent floor, and the managing partner at Hare Wynn came down one day in 1980 and asked us what we wanted to be doing in 10 years. We were young and aggressive, and we said, "Well, we'd like to be plaintiffs’ lawyers. We might even want to take over your law firm." He just laughed and said, "The reason I'm here is to give you an opportunity to come with us." We all accepted the offer. I’m now in my 46th year here, and it still seems like just yesterday that I joined. One of the consistent things about this law firm is how much better it is because of the men and women who are part of it and who believe, as Shay and I do, that it's bigger than we are. This firm has been around over 100 years, and we're at a point where I'm thrilled with the legacy we are a part of and the one we are leaving for the future.
LD: I understand your original career plan was somewhat different. You lettered at the University of Alabama under the legendary coach Bear Bryant, right?
LA: That’s right. I was a student trainer at the time and was getting ready to graduate. Coach Bryant came to me one day and asked what my plans were, and I told him I was going to be a trainer for the Saints. He asked me why in the world I would want to do that, and I told him I didn’t have the money to go to law school, though I’d always wanted to go. He asked me to come see him the next morning, and he arranged a scholarship for my first year of law school, then called the dean to set up a meeting with me. He actually got me into law school. Now, I didn’t know when I went to law school what kind of law I wanted to practice. At first, I couldn’t get out of my own way: I wanted to talk, to be on my feet, for people to hear me. I went to Montgomery, where I was an assistant attorney general for a year, and then wound up in a plaintiffs' firm in Birmingham, and I’ve been a plaintiffs’ lawyer for 52 of my 53 years of practice.
This firm has been around over 100 years, and we're at a point where I'm thrilled with the legacy we are a part of and the one we are leaving for the future.
LD: That's a fascinating story. Shay, tell me about your experience.
Shay Samples: I studied at Cumberland Law, at Samford University in Birmingham, then clerked for Hogan, Smith & Alspaugh, which competed with Hare Wynn. Roscoe Hogan, the senior partner, and Francis Hare Sr. were fierce competitors, although it was a healthy, respectful relationship. That firm was similar to Hare Wynn, handling strictly civil litigation. The only difference, really, was that we handled more medical malpractice cases. When Leon brought me to Hare Wynn in '94, I'd been practicing 18 years at the Hogan firm. I liked handling medical malpractice cases: They were challenging, and not many lawyers were taking them because they were so difficult and the defendants were winning 90 to 95 percent of the cases, which made it high risk. When I came here, I brought a practice with me that was primarily medical malpractice, and Leon got hooked on it, too. While our firm handles all kinds of civil litigation and complex matters, medical malpractice is our lifeblood now. We have a pretty impressive track record to back up our claim that we’re the best in the state.
‘The Darkest Times’
LA: Shay has clearly tried more medical malpractice cases than any other plaintiffs' lawyer in Alabama. I’m sure there are some defense folks who have been trying cases for 25 or 30 years who would have greater numbers, but on the plaintiffs’ side, Shay stands alone in terms of the number. And the truth is, you’re going to lose cases if you try them. Regardless of how good the case is, sometimes you're going to have a jury panel where there is not any way for us to win that case. That is something we don't control.
And at the same time, we also take the risk that is associated with losing those cases. We do the best we can. We don't ever back down. We go in and try them and give the families we represent the best we've got. They know it's risky because we tell them from the beginning.
These people come to us in the darkest times in their lives when they don't have anybody else to go to. They may have a death, they may have a child who’s injured at birth, they have no resources, and they are looking for accountability. You have to know in your heart, and from the heart, that you can take them by the hand and be what they are looking for you to be at that moment. The point, really, is that we see ourselves as part of that family, and we create a team approach to these cases that looks a lot like family relationships should look. And we share the good news and the bad news. I don't ever fail to tell clients the bad news. If I do, I set myself and them up for failure.
LD: Specializing in medical malpractice has obviously been one of the major ways the firm has changed over the past 30 to 45 years; tell me more about that.
LA: I became managing partner in 1996, and I remember the day I convinced the firm to take on medical malpractice cases. Mr. Hare hadn’t let us sue doctors in the past. He loved to play golf and cards with his doctor friends, and he would never let us sue doctors. I knew about Shay's success, and I knew how hard it was, but I just fell in love with that practice, especially after he came here. The truth is that if you ask people around the state to name the lawyers who really do a good job in these cases, we're going to be on that list. We're not the only ones on the list, but we're going to be on that list. I wouldn't change a thing about the opportunities that it's given us to become the lawyers we are. And I tell young lawyers this all the time: If you can learn to handle a medical malpractice case, as complicated as it is, as heartfelt as it is, as onerous as it is to handle the professionals that we have to handle, if you can do that, you will become a better lawyer quicker than any other way I know.
SS: Leon and I do it the right way. We are old-fashioned. We still look at the practice of law as a profession, as a calling – a higher calling, not just a business. One of the things that bothers both of us is that we've seen an erosion of professionalism over the past 50 or so years that is very disturbing and disappointing. The way lawyers treat each other and the lack of civility and professionalism have earned our profession a bad name. Leon and I are old school in that regard, and we try to teach younger lawyers that there's a right way, a professional way to handle things, and that should be the only way.
You have to know in your heart, and from the heart, that you can take [clients] by the hand and be what they are looking for you to be at that moment.
LD: What changes have you seen in medical malpractice cases during your careers?
LA: Covid, in particular, changed the way average jurors in the Southeast, especially Alabama, see litigation and see personal accountability.
A Number, Not a Person
SS: At one point, I was asked by our state trial lawyers’ group to give a talk about the effect of Covid on medical malpractice cases, and I predicted that the concept of heroes in scrubs would be embedded in the public psyche post-pandemic. I could not have been more wrong. Covid resulted in a further impersonalization of the medical profession.
Leon and I both grew up in small towns in Alabama where the doctor was still making house calls. That's obviously a relic of the past that's barely remembered. Most people view medicine now, unfortunately, as an assembly line, where you're a number, you're not a patient or a person.
I think jurors are more willing to hold healthcare professionals accountable in a malpractice case in Alabama today than 20 or 30 years ago because of that. The further you go back, the more difficult it was to win in Alabama because we're generally considered one of the three most conservative states in the country.
LA: People unhappy with the healthcare system today don’t have a problem hearing Shay or me stand up before a jury and say, "This is an important case because you can change the way medicine is practiced in this city and in this state, if you'll stand up and hold people accountable. I promise you the lawyer won't like the verdict, but that will be a better doctor or a better nurse if you'll hold them accountable." And we do that. We say that.
LD: That assembly-line system definitely creates a sense of dissatisfaction and distrust. Which cases stand out to you over the past several years?
SS: I learn more from cases that I lose than those I win, and that might sound odd. It’s become somewhat easier to get a plaintiffs' verdict in Alabama than it used to be, but the cases that bother me the most or that stick with me the most are the cases that I lost. There’s one in particular, maybe 40 years ago, before I came to Hare Wynn, in which a child’s brain was damaged due to lack of oxygen during delivery. The defense lawyers convinced the jury that the brain damage was the result of an issue with the parents, who were both deaf. That one still hurts me.
People unhappy with the healthcare system today don’t have a problem hearing Shay or me stand up before a jury and say, 'This is an important case because you can change the way medicine is practiced in this city and in this state.'
LA: Winning favorable verdicts for a client definitely makes a difference, but it’s not the only pathway to success. A jury verdict for monetary damages stops right there; the hospital can keep right on doing what it’s been doing. The doctor can do the same. But if you settle a case, sometimes you have the opportunity to effect long-lasting change. One example might be the way a hospital delivers a medicine or how it confirms that it’s the correct medicine. If I can negotiate a settlement that ensures a baby gets the right medicine ordered by the right pharmacist in the right dose, perhaps by establishing a new procedure, that might be something we couldn’t accomplish by trying the case in court.
Fighting for Safer Healthcare
LD: That’s an interesting point, and it’s probably one that most people don’t think about.
LA: I like to think what Shay Samples and Leon Ashford bring to the practice of law is an understanding that each case we take is the most important case to the family bringing it, to that injured baby, that injured child or that injured person. If we simply make sure that we don't ever lose sight of that, we'll have the right conversations, we'll make the right choices, we'll make informed decisions.
SS: I think Leon and I both share the feeling that the most rewarding thing in our professional lives is that we’ve made a difference and we have improved the safety of patients in Alabama, and we have spurred changes in hospital policies and procedure so that whatever tragedy occurred in an individual case that we've handled doesn't occur in the future. To make a real significant difference in the safety and integrity of the system itself is something that you can't put a price tag on. It’s worth more than all the money in the world if you can save one individual's life or prevent a permanent catastrophic injury from occurring.
