In Barrett v. Baird, 111 Nev. 1496, 908 P.2d 689 (Nev. 1995), the amicus arguing in support of the plaintiff argued that attorney's fees provision in the malpractice law denied the malpractice claimant of due process, and "suggested that a claimant must be provided with an opportunity to appeal the panel's negative finding because that finding may ultimately provide the basis for an award of attorney fees and costs under NRS 41A.056(2)." Id. at 700 n.20. The court disagreed, finding that while the review panel's decision was not subject to appellate review, the screening panel statute "provides something better - a de novo trial." Id. he court further found that "more fundamentally, amici's due process claim ignores the fact that it is not the panel finding, but the final jury verdict, that triggers the fee award." Id.