Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Double Damages Or Nothing: Whether Medicare Advantage Organizations Have A Private Cause Of Action Under The Medicare Secondary Payer Act, Jennifer A. Prevete
Double Damages Or Nothing: Whether Medicare Advantage Organizations Have A Private Cause Of Action Under The Medicare Secondary Payer Act, Jennifer A. Prevete
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Part I of this Note outlines the history and purpose of the Medicare statute, Medicare Advantage, and the MSP Act. The MSP Act dictates that insured individuals pursue coverage from “primary plans” while Medicare makes conditional payments with the agreement that the primary plans will reimburse the costs. Part II provides the MSP Act’s spectrum of interpretations and why the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals have read the private cause of action with varying expansiveness. Part III concludes that the private cause of action should not be extended to MAOs, asserting that the extension ultimately results in harm …
Constitutional Remedies: Reconciling Official Immunity With The Vindication Of Rights, Michael L. Wells
Constitutional Remedies: Reconciling Official Immunity With The Vindication Of Rights, Michael L. Wells
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Part I makes the crucial point that compensation is a tool and not a distinct goal of tort liability. With civil recourse theory as a guidepost, Part II argues that one of the aims of constitutional tort law is vindication of the plaintiffs rights. Civil recourse principles teach that vindication may be at least partly achieved even when immunity blocks compensation. Part III shows how the Court's failure to distinguish vindication from compensation has unnecessarily impeded the vindication of rights. Two important official immunity cases-Camreta v. Greene and Pearson v. Callahan -illustrate the missed opportunities and show how …
Reasonable Precaution For The Individual, Dov Waisman
Reasonable Precaution For The Individual, Dov Waisman
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
This Article has four parts. In Part I, I introduce the question to be explored and describe Barbara Fried's challenge to any attempt to answer that question without summing costs and benefits across persons. Part II responds directly to Fried's challenge, presenting the individualized feasibility principle as a viable, nonaggregative interpretation of reasonable precaution. In Part III, I explore the theoretical underpinnings of the IFP, drawing on a theory of normative ethics known as ex ante contractualism. Part IV concludes.
The Shortcomings Of New York's Long-Arm Statute: Defamation In The Age Of Technology, Robert D. Nussbaum
The Shortcomings Of New York's Long-Arm Statute: Defamation In The Age Of Technology, Robert D. Nussbaum
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
This Note suggests that the New York legislature amend New York's long-arm statute so that it no longer excludes the tort of defamation as a basis for long-arm jurisdiction. Part I provides a brief background and history of jurisdiction and longarm statutes in general. It also focuses on New York's statute more specifically. Part II focuses on the arguments for excluding acts of defamation from long-arm jurisdiction and compares New York's statute to those of other states. Finally, Part III examines the different policy reasons for changing the statute and argues that such a change will not offend Due …
The Electronic Document Retention System Ate My Homework: Gross Negligence And The Rebuttable Presumption Of Prejudice Within The Doctrine Of Spoliation In Federal Courts, Tristan Evans-Wilent
The Electronic Document Retention System Ate My Homework: Gross Negligence And The Rebuttable Presumption Of Prejudice Within The Doctrine Of Spoliation In Federal Courts, Tristan Evans-Wilent
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
This Note argues against imposing such a rebuttable presumption where the spoliating party acted with gross negligence. Part I provides a general background of the doctrine of spoliation and its application to electronic information. Part II examines the three different approaches taken by the federal circuits to whether gross negligence should trigger a rebuttable presumption that the spoliated evidence was prejudicial to the spoliating party. Finally, Part III argues that courts should not allow gross negligence to trigger a rebuttable presumption that the spoliated evidence was prejudicial to the spoliating party.