What should a doctor in a medical malpractice case do if a substantial amount of evidence emerges during trial?

In a medical malpractice case, if new substantial evidence surfaces during the trial, the appropriate step for the doctor is to move for a new trial. This course of action is justified because significant new evidence could potentially affect the outcome of the trial, suggesting that the earlier proceedings were not fair or fully informed. A motion for a new trial would allow the court to reconsider the case with the new information, ensuring that all relevant evidence is considered before reaching a verdict.

While other options might seem plausible in different contexts—requesting a continuance might be suitable at the outset or to gather additional evidence, and filing for summary judgment occurs before trial when there are no genuine disputes of material fact—the dynamic nature of trial proceedings means that any major developments during the trial itself are best addressed through a motion for a new trial. Simply dismissing the case would not address the validity of the new evidence or fully consider its implications on the trial's fairness and outcome.