Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Medical Negligence Litigation Is Not The Problem, Kenneth C. Chessick, Matthew D. Robinson
Medical Negligence Litigation Is Not The Problem, Kenneth C. Chessick, Matthew D. Robinson
Northern Illinois University Law Review
The medical malpractice insurance "crisis" results not from out-of-control juries or overly-litigious plaintiffs and their attorneys, but rather is simply the result of epidemic levels of negligence among physicians. The myth that the liability system is to blame for high premiums facing doctors creates opportunities for insurance companies to restrict plaintiffs' access to courtrooms and to limit the amount of compensation they may receive after proving negligence. This article examines and debunks the leading myths regarding the so-called "crisis" and presents several suggestions that may improve the healthcare provided to patients nationwide.
The Fleecing Of Seriously Injured Medical Malpractice Victims In Illinois, Frank A. Perrecone, Lisa R. Fabiano
The Fleecing Of Seriously Injured Medical Malpractice Victims In Illinois, Frank A. Perrecone, Lisa R. Fabiano
Northern Illinois University Law Review
The Supreme Court of Illinois has twice held that caps on damages are unconstitutional. In 1976, the court held in Wright v. Central DuPage Hospital Association that a cap on damages in medical malpractice cases constitutes special legislation in violation of the 1970 Illinois Constitution. Twenty-one years later, in Best v. Taylor Machine Works, the court held that a cap on non-economic damages in bodily injury and death cases is special legislation as well as a violation of the separation of powers clause. Despite these clear precedents, last year Governor Rod Blagojevich capitulated to public pressure manipulated by the powerful …
Why Medical Malpractice Caps Are Wrong, Patrick A. Salvi
Why Medical Malpractice Caps Are Wrong, Patrick A. Salvi
Northern Illinois University Law Review
In recent years, many states have passed legislation limiting the amount of recovery in medical malpractice cases. One primary purpose behind these caps is to lower medical malpractice insurance premiums. Unfortunately, damage caps neither reduce malpractice premiums nor prevent premium increases. In addition, damage caps neither lower consumer health care costs nor prevent frivolous litigation. Even worse, damage caps prevent victims of malpractice from being fully compensated for damages they received as a result of another's negligence. Not only are damage caps incapable of effecting tort reform, but they have a catastrophic effect on those victims, who receive unfair and …
Doctors, Duties, Death And Data: A Critical Review Of The Empirical Literature On Medical Malpractice And Tort Reform, Geoffrey Christopher Rapp
Doctors, Duties, Death And Data: A Critical Review Of The Empirical Literature On Medical Malpractice And Tort Reform, Geoffrey Christopher Rapp
Northern Illinois University Law Review
Much of the debate on medical malpractice and tort reform ignores the recent emergence of a fairly substantial volume of empirical research on the subject. There have been a large number of empirical (i.e., statistical) papers put out from law professors, economists, and others, on a number of medical malpractice and tort reform topics. This article consists of critical literature review covering selected empirical papers on these topics. The paper asks what malpractice practitioners, state legislatures, and legal academics learn from the data work that's been done. Rather than report the results of any original data analysis, the article evaluates …
Things To Do (Or Not) To Address The Medical Malpractice Insurance Problem, Edward J. Kionka
Things To Do (Or Not) To Address The Medical Malpractice Insurance Problem, Edward J. Kionka
Northern Illinois University Law Review
The article begins with an overview of the tort reform problem; federal vs. state level reform; a history of tort reform in Illinois; current Illinois law (prior to P.A. 94-677) specific to medical malpractice cases or that particularly impacts those cases; discussion of prior caps and the cases holding them unconstitutional; discussion of P.A. 89-7, which was held unconstitutional in the Best case; discussion of the 2005 legislation (P.A. 94-677) and whether it is constitutional; and finally, "where do we go from here," which includes my ideas for reform that build on the reforms already in place. An appendix includes …
The Inevitable Reevaluation Of Best V. Taylor In Light Of Illinois' Health Care Crisis, Carolyn Victoria J. Lees
The Inevitable Reevaluation Of Best V. Taylor In Light Of Illinois' Health Care Crisis, Carolyn Victoria J. Lees
Northern Illinois University Law Review
In the 1997 Illinois Supreme Court decision of Best v. Taylor Machine Works, the court held that caps on non-compensatory damages violated the Illinois Constitution. However, in light of the current health care insurance crisis, the court may have to reconsider this issue. This article re-crafts the decision, ultimately arguing that caps are constitutional. The intention of the article is three-fold. First, the article attempts to bring greater attention to a growing problem that requires immediate addressing, while advocating a direct and administratively simple solution. Second, the article seeks to provide a historical overview of caps on non-compensatory damages relating …
Killing The Fatted Calf: Managed Care Liability In A Post-Pegram World, Karene M. Boos, Eric J. Boos
Killing The Fatted Calf: Managed Care Liability In A Post-Pegram World, Karene M. Boos, Eric J. Boos
Northern Illinois University Law Review
Over one hundred million Americans receive their health care benefits under some kind of managed care plan. At the heart of every managed care plan is an emphasis on cost containment. The courts traditionally protected the proprietary economic interests of managed care by holding that claims against managed care organizations and plan directors were preempted under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). This was done as a means of facilitating a better health care delivery system for Americans and in spite of the number of patients who suffered poor health consequences as a result of decisions by managed care …
Apparent Authority And Healthcare In Illinois, Marc D. Ginsberg
Apparent Authority And Healthcare In Illinois, Marc D. Ginsberg
Northern Illinois University Law Review
This piece examines and dissects two Illinois Supreme Court cases which utilized apparent authority to hold hospitals and HMOs vicariously liable for non-agent or non-servant agent physician negligence. The author argues that the supreme court's effort to ground these decisions in classical agency law is misplaced. The article provides a general overview of the concept of respondeat superior and apparent authority, as well as a brief introduction to the structure of hospitals and HMOs. The author asserts that apparent authority should not be applied in the healthcare setting. Specific problems are roadblocks in the path of the Illinois Supreme Court's …
The Dilemma Of Chance In Medical Malpractice: Should Illinois Recognize A New Cause Of Action For "Lost Chance" Of Survivability?, Jeffrey L. Benson
The Dilemma Of Chance In Medical Malpractice: Should Illinois Recognize A New Cause Of Action For "Lost Chance" Of Survivability?, Jeffrey L. Benson
Northern Illinois University Law Review
This Comment examines the elements of causation and valuation in medical malpractice actions where a physician's negligence reduced his/her patient's chances of recovering from a pre-existing illness and direct proof of causation is unavailable. The Comment focuses on current Illinois case law regarding "lost chance" of survival and advocates that Illinois adopt a new cause of action which would compensate plaintiffs for this loss on a proportional basis that would reflect the magnitude of the diminished possibility of recovery.
Medical Malpractice: Constitutional Implications Of A Cap On Damages, Lisa A. Treviranus
Medical Malpractice: Constitutional Implications Of A Cap On Damages, Lisa A. Treviranus
Northern Illinois University Law Review
In an effort to remedy the medical malpractice insurance crisis, a number of states have enacted caps on damages. These caps limit the amount a medical malpractice plaintiff can collect. When. challenged on constitutional grounds, some caps have survived attack while others have been struck down. This comment examines and categorizes the analyses used by state courts which have ruled on the constitutionality of caps on damages. Additionally, this comment suggests criteria which should be reviewed by state legislatures planning to adopt a cap, in an effort to insure that the cap will survive constitutional challenge.