Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Baker v. State (2)
- Common Benefits Clause (2)
- Constitutional jurisprudence (2)
- Constitutional scholarship (2)
- Health law (2)
-
- Law school curriculum (2)
- Medical malpractice (2)
- New Judicial Federalism (2)
- Same-sex marriage (2)
- State constitutional law (2)
- Vermont (2)
- "sorry" laws (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Comparative law (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Constitutional Rights (1)
- Damage caps (1)
- Disclosure and early offer (1)
- Health courts (1)
- Japan (1)
- Japanese law and society (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Analysis and Writing (1)
- Legal Education (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Malpractice (1)
- Malpractice claim rates (1)
- Publication
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Civil Law
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
Charles H. Baron
In Baker v. State, the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that the state constitution’s Common Benefits Clause prohibits the exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage. Baker has been praised by constitutional scholars as a prototypical example of the New Judicial Federalism. The authors agree, asserting that the decision sets a standard for constitutional discourse by dint of the manner in which each of the opinions connects and responds to the others, pulls together arguments from other state and federal constitutional authorities, and provides a clear basis for subsequent development of constitutional principle. This Article explores …
Medical Malpractice Reform Measures And Their Effects, Robert Leflar
Medical Malpractice Reform Measures And Their Effects, Robert Leflar
Robert B Leflar
New rules and methods for medical injury dispute resolution have been launched in New Hampshire and New York, and demonstration projects are underway elsewhere. This article describes major medical malpractice reforms undertaken and proposed in recent years. Reforms are classified as (1) liability-limiting initiatives favoring health-care providers; (2) procedural innovations promoted as improving dispute resolution processes, such as patient compensation funds, “sorry” laws, disclosure and early offer laws, health courts, and safe harbor laws; and (3) major conceptual reforms to move liability away from physicians to hospitals or administrative no-fault compensation systems. Empirical evidence about the practical effects of already-implemented …
The Regulation Of Medical Malpractice In Japan, Robert Leflar
The Regulation Of Medical Malpractice In Japan, Robert Leflar
Robert B Leflar
How Japanese legal and social institutions handle medical errors is little known outside Japan. For almost all of the 20th century, a paternalistic paradigm prevailed. Characteristics of the legal environment affecting Japanese medicine included few attorneys handling medical cases, low litigation rates, long delays, predictable damage awards, and low-cost malpractice insurance. However, transparency principles have gained traction and public concern over medical errors has intensified. Recent legal developments include courts' adoption of a less deferential standard of informed consent; increases in the numbers of malpractice claims and of practicing attorneys; more efficient claims handling by specialist judges and speedier trials; …
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
Charles H. Baron
In Baker v. State, the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that the state constitution’s Common Benefits Clause prohibits the exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage. Baker has been praised by constitutional scholars as a prototypical example of the New Judicial Federalism. The authors agree, asserting that the decision sets a standard for constitutional discourse by dint of the manner in which each of the opinions connects and responds to the others, pulls together arguments from other state and federal constitutional authorities, and provides a clear basis for subsequent development of constitutional principle. This Article explores …