Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Medical Jurisprudence
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.
Aids: Testing Democracy - Irrational Responses To The Public Health Crisis And The Need For Privacy In Serologic Testing, 19 J. Marshall L. Rev. 835 (1986), Michael L. Closen, Susan Marie Connor, Howard L. Kaufman, Mark E. Wojcik
Aids: Testing Democracy - Irrational Responses To The Public Health Crisis And The Need For Privacy In Serologic Testing, 19 J. Marshall L. Rev. 835 (1986), Michael L. Closen, Susan Marie Connor, Howard L. Kaufman, Mark E. Wojcik
Mark E. Wojcik
No abstract provided.
Good Medicine/Bad Medicine And The Law Of Evidence: Is There A Role For Proof Of Character, Propensity, Or Prior Bad Conduct In Medical Negligence Litigation?, 63 S.C. L. Rev. 367 (2011), Marc Ginsberg
Marc D. Ginsberg
No abstract provided.
Informed Consent: No Longer Just What The Doctor Ordered - The Contributions Of Medical Associations And Courts To A More Patient Friendly Doctrine, 15 Mich. St. U. J. Med. & L. 17 (2010), Marc Ginsberg
Marc D. Ginsberg
No abstract provided.
How Much Anguish Is Enough - Baby Switching And Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, 13 Depaul J. Health Care L. 255 (2010), Marc Ginsberg
How Much Anguish Is Enough - Baby Switching And Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, 13 Depaul J. Health Care L. 255 (2010), Marc Ginsberg
Marc D. Ginsberg
No abstract provided.
Not For The Faint Of Heart: Does A Hospital Owe A Duty To Warn A Squeamish Visitor?, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 473 (2008), Marc D. Ginsberg, Tricia E. Mcvicker
Not For The Faint Of Heart: Does A Hospital Owe A Duty To Warn A Squeamish Visitor?, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 473 (2008), Marc D. Ginsberg, Tricia E. Mcvicker
Marc D. Ginsberg
No abstract provided.
The Locality Rule Lives! Why? Using Modern Medicine To Eradicate An “Unhealthy” Law, 61 Drake L. Rev. 321 (2013), Marc Ginsberg
The Locality Rule Lives! Why? Using Modern Medicine To Eradicate An “Unhealthy” Law, 61 Drake L. Rev. 321 (2013), Marc Ginsberg
Marc D. Ginsberg
The "locality rule" places a geographical dimension on the professional standard of care in medical negligence litigation. It requires the measurement of a physician's conduct by a standard focusing on the geographical location of the treatment provided. This Article traces the origin of the locality rule, discusses its related practical problems, focuses on the states in which it exists, suggests that the rule is archaic, and explains how modern medicine (undergraduate medical education, graduate medical education, state medical licensure, board certification, continuing medical education and practice guidelines) is well positioned to eradicate it.
Universal Health Care And The Continued Reliance On Custom In Determining Medical Malpractice, James A. Henderson Jr., John A. Siliciano
Universal Health Care And The Continued Reliance On Custom In Determining Medical Malpractice, James A. Henderson Jr., John A. Siliciano
John A. Siliciano
No abstract provided.
Wealth, Equity, And The Unitary Medical Malpractice Standard, John A. Siliciano
Wealth, Equity, And The Unitary Medical Malpractice Standard, John A. Siliciano
John A. Siliciano
No abstract provided.
Amicus Brief, Lebron V. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, Neil Vidmar, Tom Baker, Ralph L. Brill, Martha Chamallas, Stephen Daniels, Thomas A. Eaton, Theodore Eisenberg, Neal R. Feigenson, Lucinda M. Finley, Marc Galanter, Valerie P. Hans, Michael Heise, Edward J. Kionka, Thomas H. Koenig, Herbert M. Kritzer, David I. Levine, Nancy S. Marder, Joanne Martin, Frank M. Mcclellan, Deborah Jones Merritt, Philip G. Peters, Jr., James T. Richardson, Charles Silver, Richard W. Wright
Amicus Brief, Lebron V. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, Neil Vidmar, Tom Baker, Ralph L. Brill, Martha Chamallas, Stephen Daniels, Thomas A. Eaton, Theodore Eisenberg, Neal R. Feigenson, Lucinda M. Finley, Marc Galanter, Valerie P. Hans, Michael Heise, Edward J. Kionka, Thomas H. Koenig, Herbert M. Kritzer, David I. Levine, Nancy S. Marder, Joanne Martin, Frank M. Mcclellan, Deborah Jones Merritt, Philip G. Peters, Jr., James T. Richardson, Charles Silver, Richard W. Wright
Michael Heise
Illinois Public Act 82-280, § 2-1706.5, as amended by P.A. 94-677, § 330 (eff. Aug. 25, 2005), and as codified as 735 ILCS 5/2-1706.5(a), imposes a $500,000 “cap” on the noneconomic damages that may be awarded in a medical malpractice suit against a physician or other health care professional, and a $1 million “cap” on the noneconomic damages that may be awarded against a hospital, its affiliates, or their employees. This brief will address two of the questions presented for review by the parties: 1. Does the cap violate the Illinois Constitution’s prohibition on “special legislation,” Art. IV, § 3, …