Contrary to popular belief, juries in malpractice cases usually sympathize more with physicians than patients, according to a law professor who reviewed studies involving malpractice cases from 1989 to 2006. University of Missouri, Columbia, School of Law professor Philip Peters found that plaintiffs rarely win weak cases, although they have more success in “toss-up” cases and better outcomes in cases with strong evidence of medical negligence. Peters, whose study appeared in the Michigan Law Review, said several factors favor medical defendants, including superior resources, physicians' social standing, social norms against “profiting” by injury, and willingness to give physicians the benefit of the doubt when evidence conflicts.