For more than 30 years, most of the patients in Dr. R's thriving primary care practice had been of retirement age. Now that he was 62, they were his contemporaries. Dr. R treated patients the way that he wanted to be treated— with respect and without unnecessary tests.

Dr. L, 63, was a general practitioner in the suburbs of a northeastern city. He had a reputation among colleagues and patients for being compassionate and caring, and his bustling practice was a result of the positive word-of-mouth spread by his patients.

Dr. U, 41, was a sole urologist in a small community in the Midwest. He'd been in private practice for only two years, but he felt quite positive about his professional prospects and his future—until he was sued.

Dr. N was a board-certified general and abdominal surgeon who had bounced around for five years after graduating from his residency program. At last, he settled down and decided to build a practice in a Northeastern community near his alma mater.

When the emergency department nurses had difficulty passing a urethral catheter, Dr. S was the urologist on call. One such case led to a malpractice suit.

Dr. M, 56, was an old hand at the twists and turns of prostatic cancer. He'd been taught well by a urology professor who drawled, "It's just like huntin' swamp foxes. You never know what direction they're gonna turn next." Still, the professor's wisdom failed to shield Dr. M from a malpractice suit.

Ms. J, 60, was a nurse administrator at a large HMO clinic for most of her career. Her duties were mostly recruiting, scheduling, and resolving staff problems. When she was dismissed and replaced by a younger (and lower-paid) woman, she sued for age discrimination.

At age 38, Dr. K was new to private practice. He had completed his residency three years earlier and formed a partnership with an established general urologist in the Northeast. They investigated PSA levels by repeated testing, ultrasound, and, when necessary, biopsy. (Ratios of free/ bound PSA were not available at the time.) A patient with a mildly elevated PSA involved Dr. K in a malpractice suit.

Dr. W, 56, was an experienced urologist in a small suburban community in the South. His surgical skills and common-sense approach earned him the trust of his patients. Many of his cases involved renal stones, and one such case involved him in a malpractice suit.

Dr. R, 32, graduated as the top resident in his urology program. He turned down an opportuni-ty in academia to join an established group practice in his hometown. Ironically, his stellar academic credentials worked against him when he was sued for malpractice a year later.