Legal background
It is common for cases to settle “on the courthouse steps,” or right before trial (and sometimes in the midst of trial). Settling when the jury is deliberating is less common, but it does happen. The reason is that juries are unpredictable, and often one or both of the parties to a lawsuit will suddenly fear that the jury might not decide in their favor. Settling is almost always a better option.
Protecting yourself
Dr. W failed to meet the standard of care in this case. In his mind, his obligation to his patient did not extend above the waist, but of course that is not correct. As Mr. Q's surgeon, he was responsible for his post-op care as well. Simply relying on the nursing staff's notes about his patient's condition was not enough. He should have examined his patient's lungs, taken a second blood test, and made sure that his patient was well enough to be released from the hospital.
The duty to a patient extends past the one area of specialty – referring Mr. Q to the chief resident was not enough. Similarly, Dr. R was also negligent for not following up on the patient's symptoms. Whether the patient's life might have been cut short by cancer was not the issue here: His life was, in fact, cut short by negligent follow-up.