Law Commons^™

Patient Decision Aids Improve Patient Safety And Reduce Medical Liability Risk, Thaddeus Pope

Faculty Scholarship

Tort-based doctrines of informed consent have utterly failed to assure that patients understand the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the healthcare they receive. Fifty years of experience with the doctrine of informed consent have shown it to be an abject catastrophe. Most patients lack an even minimal understanding of their treatment options. But there is hope. Substantial evidence shows that patient decision aids (PDAs) and shared decision making can bridge the gap between the theory and practice of informed consent. These evidence-based educational tools empower patients to make decisions with significantly more knowledge and less decisional conflict than clinician-patient discussions …

How Covid-19 Put The Spotlight On The Emtala, Ikra Kafayat

Touro Law Review

There was a time when those that were unable to afford medical care risked being denied treatment in emergency situations. Before Congress passed Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA), patients were being transferred to different hospitals, without being screened, because they did not have insurance and could not afford the treatment. Hospitals are no longer allowed to transport patients without properly screening and stabilizing them. Patients can bring a suit against a hospital if they believe the hospital violated EMTALA, however, in certain circuits the patient will need to prove that hospital had an “improper motive” for failing to …

Feres: The “Double-Edged Sword”, Kaitlan Price

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In Feres v. United States, the Supreme Court barred service members from suing the Government under the Federal Tort Claims Act if the injuries occurred “incident to military service.” In establishing this doctrine, the Court discussed the necessity of protecting the military from lawsuits to ensure effective decision-making by military leaders.

Scholars have harshly criticized Feres in the modern era, arguing Feres must be overturned to provide service members with a greater opportunity for recovery. Specifically, many scholars admonish Feres because the Supreme Court failed to provide a clear definition of “incident to military service.” Lacking a clear definition …

A Malpractice-Based Duty To Disclose The Risk Of Stillbirth: A Response To Lens, Nadia N. Sawicki

Faculty Publications & Other Works

In Medical Paternalism, Stillbirth, & Blindsided Mothers, Lens argues that physicians who fail to disclose the risk of stillbirth to pregnant patients should be liable under the doctrine of informed consent. In this Response, I suggest that courts might be hesitant to expand informed consent in the way Lens proposes. Instead, I offer an alternative avenue for imposing liability, via traditional theories of medical malpractice.

Jewish Law And The Concept Of Negligence, Steven F. Friedell

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Torts: Just Walk Away: How An Overbroad Foreseeability Of Harm Standard Could Kill “Curbside Consultations” — Warren V. Dinter, 926 N.W.2d 370 (Minn. 2019), Erika Miller

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Choosing Medical Malpractice, Nadia N. Sawicki

Nadia N. Sawicki

Modern principles of patient autonomy and health care consumerism are at odds with medical malpractice law's traditional skepticism towards the defenses of contractual waiver and assumption of risk. Many American courts follow a patient-protective view, exemplified by the reasoning in the seminal Tunkl case, rejecting any attempts by physicians to relieve themselves of liability on the grounds of a patient's agreement to assume the risk of malpractice. However, where patients pursue unconventional treatments that satisfy their personal preferences but that arguably fall outside the standard of care, courts have good reason to be more receptive to such defenses. This Article …

How Liability Insurers Protect Patients And Improve Safety, Tom Baker, Charles Silver

All Faculty Scholarship

Forty years after the publication of the first systematic study of adverse medical events, there is greater access to information about adverse medical events and increasingly widespread acceptance of the view that patient safety requires more than vigilance by well-intentioned medical professionals. In this essay, we describe some of the ways that medical liability insurance organizations contributed to this transformation, and we catalog the roles that those organizations play in promoting patient safety today. Whether liability insurance in fact discourages providers from improving safety or encourages them to protect patients from avoidable harms is an empirical question that a survey …

"Sorry" Is Never Enough: How State Apology Laws Fail To Reduce Medical Malpractice Liability Risk, W. Kip Viscusi, Benjamin J. Mcmichael, R. Lawrence Van Horn

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Based on case studies indicating that apologies from physicians to patients can promote healing, understanding, and dispute resolution, 38 states have sought to reduce litigation and medical malpractice liability by enacting apology laws. Apology laws facilitate apologies by making them inadmissible in subsequent malpractice trials.

The underlying assumption regarding the potential efficacy of these laws is that, after receiving an apology, patients will be less likely to pursue a malpractice claim and will be more likely to settle those claims that are filed. However, once a patient has been made aware that the physician has committed a medical error, the …

2018 Survey Of Rhode Island Case Law

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Ais Outperform Doctors: Confronting The Challenges Of A Tort-Induced Over-Reliance On Machine Learning, A. Michael Froomkin, Ian Kerr, Joelle Pineau

Articles

Someday, perhaps soon, diagnostics generated by machine learning (ML) will have demonstrably better success rates than those generated by human doctors. What will the dominance of ML diagnostics mean for medical malpractice law, for the future of medical service provision, for the demand for certain kinds of doctors, and in the long run for the quality of medical diagnostics itself?

This Article argues that once ML diagnosticians, such as those based on neural networks, are shown to be superior, existing medical malpractice law will require superior ML-generated medical diagnostics as the standard of care in clinical settings. Further, unless implemented …

Healthism In Tort Law, Elizabeth Weeks

Scholarly Works

This article draws on the author's recently published book, Healthism: Health Status Discrimination and the Law (with Jessica L. Roberts) (Cambridge University Press 2018), examining tort law doctrine and policy for examples of differential treatment of health status or behaviors. Just as scholars previously have drawn attention to discrimination based on race, sex, age, and other protected categories in tort law, the article urges similar examination of tort law's potential to discriminate against the unhealthy. The article discusses the potential for healthism in the reasonably prudent person standard of care, contributory negligence, assumption of the risk, noneconomic damages caps, impaired …

Medical Malpractice Compensation Reform, Ruby Dean

Political Science Undergraduate Honors Theses

Tort reform legislation is a topic that has been discussed and studied heavily in the states of Texas and California. This is because it has been claimed that these states have had success in bringing more doctors into the states. This thesis studies those states, as well as the state of Arkansas. It examines Arkansas because tort reform legislation was an issue brought up in the most recent election in November 2018 in that state. Although Arkansas’ tort reform ballot measure was removed from the ballot by the Supreme Court of Arkansas, a similar measure could still be brought forth …

Maine Physician Practice Guidelines: Implications For Medical Malpractice Litigation, Jennifer S. Begel

Maine Law Review

This Article assesses the use of physician practice guidelines as a vehicle for medical malpractice tort reform and focuses upon the State of Maine's legislation incorporating physician practice parameters into the defense of medical malpractice litigation. The Maine Medical Liability Demonstration Project (the “Demonstration Project”) legislatively adopts practice guidelines in four different medical specialties and allows physicians in those specialties to assert compliance with the applicable guideline as an affirmative defense. The affirmative defense of compliance with such guidelines has been touted as a means of protecting physicians from, and decreasing the costs associated with, medical malpractice litigation. While the …

Choosing Medical Malpractice, Nadia N. Sawicki

Faculty Publications & Other Works

Modern principles of patient autonomy and health care consumerism are at odds with medical malpractice law's traditional skepticism towards the defenses of contractual waiver and assumption of risk. Many American courts follow a patient-protective view, exemplified by the reasoning in the seminal Tunkl case, rejecting any attempts by physicians to relieve themselves of liability on the grounds of a patient's agreement to assume the risk of malpractice. However, where patients pursue unconventional treatments that satisfy their personal preferences but that arguably fall outside the standard of care, courts have good reason to be more receptive to such defenses. This Article …

Negligence Per Se Theories In Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation, Andrew E. Costa

Maine Law Review

The notion of addressing the vagaries of negligence per se theories in the context of pharmaceutical and medical device litigation seems to promise little more than a monograph anesthetized by a body of obscure pharmaceutical and medical device provisions viewed through the lenses of various states' negligence law. Maybe little more than that can be assured. However, the issue of how courts should address negligence per se theories in this context implicates a variety of “larger” (or, possibly, more interesting) legal issues in general and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation in particular. Perhaps foremost among these issues is the interaction …

Unconstitutional Asymmetry Or A Rational Basis For Inconsistency? The Admissibility Of Medical Malpractice Prelitigation Screening Panel Findings Before And After Smith V. Hawthorne I And Ii, Matthew Asnault Morris

Maine Law Review

Pre-litigation screening panels have been instrumental in streamlining medical malpractice litigation in the State of Maine by culling claims from superior court dockets, encouraging settlements, and providing findings of fact that could prove useful for a jury if the case proceeds to trial. In enacting one particular provision governing the confidentiality and the admissibility of the screening panel process, however, the legislature may have sacrificed the constitutional rights of medical malpractice claimants in favor of a lighter docket. Two recent cases before the Law Court, Smith I and II, have challenged the constitutionality of Maine’s unique statutory approach to the …

Tipping The Scales?: Maine Adopts The Continuing Negligent Treatment Doctrine In Baker V. Farrand, Michael P. Beers

Maine Law Review

In Baker v. Farrand, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that for a series of related negligent acts or omissions committed by a health care provider or practitioner, a single cause of action “accrues” under the Maine Health Security Act (hereinafter MHSA) on the date of the last act or omission that contributed to the plaintiff’s injury. Hence, in situations where a physician provides continuing negligent treatment to a patient in which each and every one of the physician’s actions are negligent, the MHSA’s three-year statute of limitations does not begin to run until the …

Trial And Error: Legislating Adr For Medical Malpractice Reform, Lydia Nussbaum

Maryland Law Review

The U.S. healthcare system has a problem: hundreds of thousands of people die each year, and over a million are injured, by medical mistakes that could have been avoided. Furthermore, over ninety percent of these patients and their families never learn of the errors or receive redress. This problem persists, despite myriad reforms to the medical malpractice system, because of lawmakers’ dominant focus on reducing providers’ liability insurance costs. Reform objectives are beginning to change, however, and the vehicle for implementing these changes is alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”). Historically, legislatures deployed ADR to curb malpractice litigation and restrict patients’ access …

Torts: No Statutory Interpretation Required—Guzick V. Kimball, Marcus Jardine

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Despite Trump, Federal ‘Tort Reform’ Makes A Hasty Retreat, Joanne Doroshow

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

The Treatment For Malpractice – Physician, Enhance Thyself: The Impact Of Neuroenhancements For Medical Malpractice, Harvey L. Fiser

Pace Law Review

This article will introduce some of the issues and offer some possible guidelines which may eventually guide cases of medical malpractice and medical care in the face of neurointerventions. First, I will briefly address the standard of care in medical malpractice cases in general. Second, I will discuss some of the existing and potential physical and neurological enhancements available for physicians. Finally, I will explore how these neurointerventions could alter the standards for medical malpractice for both the enhanced doctors and the entire medical profession.

The Affordable Care Act Is Not Tort Reform, Andrew F. Popper

Catholic University Law Review

On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Prior to the enactment of the PPACA, Congress held several hearings focused on subrogation and relaxation of collateral source restrictions as well as caps on damages in an effort to promote tort reform. While the ACA included provisions on medical liability reform, the suggested tort reform was thwarted, and the ACA had no actual legal effect on limiting medical malpractice liability. This article argues that the reality is that the PPACA has done nothing to change the admissibility of collateral sources nor has it enhanced …

Medical Malpractice And Wrongful Death: Some Lives Are Worth More Than Others, Ralph Peeples, Catherine T. Harris

Ralph Peeples

We examined the outcomes and case characteristics of all the wrongful death lawsuits defended by a medical malpractice insurer in Virginia and North Carolina from 2009 through 2014. We derived our data from the insurer's closed claims files. Our goal was to identify the factors that affected whether compensation was paid, as well as the factors that affected the amount of compensation, when that occurred. Using multivariate analysis, we found that four variables had predictive power: the claims adjuster's assessment of liability, the age of the deceased, the marital status of the deceased, and whether the primary physician-defendant was engaged …

Loss Of Chance, Probabilistic Cause, And Damage Calculations: The Error In Matsuyama V. Birnbaum And The Majority Rule Of Damages In Many Jurisdictions More Generally, Robert J. Rhee

Robert Rhee

This short commentary corrects an erroneous understanding of probabilistic causation in the loss-of-chance doctrine and the damage calculation method adopted in Matsuyama v. Birnbaum. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts is not alone. Many other common law courts have made the same error, including Indiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, and Oklahoma. The consistency in the mistake suggests that the error is the majority rule of damages. I demonstrate here that this majority rule is based on erroneous mathematical reasoning and the fallacy of probabilistic logic.

Medical Malpractice - Statute Of Limitations - Foreign Objects - The Adoption Of The Discovery Rule - Legislative Or Judicial Prerogative? Melnyk V. Cleveland Clinic, Alan J. Sobol

Akron Law Review

The rationale of the Court was that Melnyk could be distinguished with the recent case of Wyler v. Tripi, which held that a cause of action for medical malpractice accrues at the latest when the physician-patient relationship terminates, and which also recognized the legislature's authority to act in this area, on the basis that Wyler was not a foreign object case. Therefore, the Court felt it need not disturb the Wyler holding and could nevertheless hold the failure to remove the foreign objects in Melnyk was negligence as a matter of law and that equity and public policy require …

The Treatment For Malpractice – Physician, Enhance Thyself: The Impact Of Neuroenhancements For Medical Malpractice, Harvey L. Fiser

Harvey L. Fiser

Coming to a hospital near you, the medically enhanced doctor - a doctor who thinks faster, is better with short and long term memory, is calmer during surgery, can work double shifts with little cognitive fatigue, and one day may have the memories of years of experience without actually having had them. With the expanded use of cognitive enhancing pharmaceuticals such as Adderall, Provigil, and more on the way, we are already seeing changes in education and the corporate world. From reaching a “normal” status for a person with an ADHD diagnosis to creating the “supernormal” employee with cognitive enhancers, …

Welsh V. United States, The Sixth Circuit Gives A Physics Lesson - For Every Action There Is An Equal And Opposite Reaction, Daniel L. Bell

Akron Law Review

This casenote will review the facts of Welsh v. United States and present the current judicial approaches to spoliation of evidence in civil litigation. Second, the note will analyze the Welsh court's proposed solution to the spoliation problem. Finally, the note will discuss the use of the Welsh approach in litigation and management implications for health care facilities.

Mcmullen V. Ohio State University Hospitals: This Isn't Vegas, But Don't Tell The Courts - Playing With Percentages And The Loss-Of-Chance Doctrine, Christopher Paul Reuscher

Akron Law Review

Part II of this note presents a background on the history of, and alternative theories to, the loss-of-chance doctrine. Part III presents the facts, procedural history, holding, and reasoning of the case. Part IV scrutinizes and assesses the court’s holding, the various public policy implications, and the future effect on medical malpractice claims. Finally, Part V concludes the paper. Essentially, the question is whether the loss-of-chance doctrine will apply when a plaintiff proves a direct causal connection between the injury and the defendant’s negligent act.

The Struggle Over Tort Reform And The Overlooked Legacy Of The Progressives, Rachel M. Janutis

Akron Law Review

In attempting to distinguish the 1950s and 1960s tort expansion from the current tort retraction, the scholarly account depicts the tort expansion as primarily a judicial movement led by legal academics devoid of any self-interest. In contrast, this account holds out the current tort retraction as a mainly political movement driven by the economic self-interest of its proponents...First, contemporary tort reform, rather than solely being a reaction to tort expansion in the 1950s and 1960s, is part of a continuing debate between corporate, professional and insurance interests on one side and consumer interests and the trial bar on the other …