Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 17 of 17
Full-Text Articles in Law
2018 Survey Of Rhode Island Case Law
2018 Survey Of Rhode Island Case Law
Roger Williams University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Tipping The Scales?: Maine Adopts The Continuing Negligent Treatment Doctrine In Baker V. Farrand, Michael P. Beers
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 …
Humboldt Gen. Hosp. V. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 53 (Jul. 28, 2016), Rob Schmidt
Humboldt Gen. Hosp. V. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 53 (Jul. 28, 2016), Rob Schmidt
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that allegations raising the scope of informed consent rather than the absence of consent to a medical procedure, even when pleaded as a battery action, constitute medical malpractice claims, and are subject to the NRS 41A.071 requirement for a medical expert affidavit.
William Nathan Baxter V. Dignity Health, Et Al, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (September 24, 2015), Andrea Orwoll
William Nathan Baxter V. Dignity Health, Et Al, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (September 24, 2015), Andrea Orwoll
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from a district court order dismissing a medical malpractice complaint. The Court held that because NRS § 41A.071 creates threshold requirements for bringing medical malpractice suits, it must be construed consistently with the liberal pleading requirements. The Court reversed and remanded.
Trial By Jury Or Judge: Transcending Empiricism, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg
Trial By Jury Or Judge: Transcending Empiricism, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg
Kevin M. Clermont
Pity the civil jury, seen by some as the sickest organ of a sick system. Yet the jury has always been controversial. One might suppose that, with so much at stake for so long, we would all know a lot about the ways juries differ from judges in their behavior. In fact, we know remarkably little. This Article provides the first large-scale comparison of plaintiff win rates and recoveries in civil cases tried before juries and judges. In two of the most controversial areas of modern tort law--product liability and medical malpractice--the win rates substantially differ from other cases' win …
No Adequate Recompense For Destruction: The Constitutionality Of The New York Medical Malpractice Statute Of Limitations As Applied To Misdiagnosis Of Latent Disease, Lillian M. Spiess
No Adequate Recompense For Destruction: The Constitutionality Of The New York Medical Malpractice Statute Of Limitations As Applied To Misdiagnosis Of Latent Disease, Lillian M. Spiess
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Shielding Hippocrates: Nevada's Expanded Pleading Standard For Medical Malpractice Actions And The Need For Legislative Reform, Justin Shiroff
Shielding Hippocrates: Nevada's Expanded Pleading Standard For Medical Malpractice Actions And The Need For Legislative Reform, Justin Shiroff
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Civil Practice And Procedure, John C. Lynch, Jon S. Hubbard, M. Elizabeth Woodard
Civil Practice And Procedure, John C. Lynch, Jon S. Hubbard, M. Elizabeth Woodard
University of Richmond Law Review
This article summarizes the major developments in Virginia civil practice and procedure over the past two years, specifically covering significant decisions by the Supreme Court of Virginiaand changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia dating from April 22, 2005, to April 20, 2007. The article also addresses legislative enactments by the General Assembly in its 2005 and 2006 sessions.
Uncertainty And Informed Choice: Unmasking Daubert, Margaret A. Berger, Aaron D. Twerski
Uncertainty And Informed Choice: Unmasking Daubert, Margaret A. Berger, Aaron D. Twerski
Michigan Law Review
This Article will first examine why it is that plaintiffs have been unable to prove causation under the Daubert guidelines in toxic tort litigation. Second, it will look at the two existing models for informed choice litigation medical malpractice and products liability-and demonstrate why neither of these models gives toxic tort plaintiffs a fair opportunity to recover for the deprivation of patient autonomy against drug manufacturers who have breached their duty to warn of known or knowable risks. Finally, this Article will explore the elements of a causation-free informed choice cause of action. It will suggest the appropriate standard for …
Civil Procedure: Medical Malpractice Gets Eerie: The Erie Implications Of A Heightened Pleading Burden In Oklahoma, Dace A. Caldwell
Civil Procedure: Medical Malpractice Gets Eerie: The Erie Implications Of A Heightened Pleading Burden In Oklahoma, Dace A. Caldwell
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 1999 and 2000.
Trial By Jury Or Judge: Transcending Empiricism, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg
Trial By Jury Or Judge: Transcending Empiricism, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Pity the civil jury, seen by some as the sickest organ of a sick system. Yet the jury has always been controversial. One might suppose that, with so much at stake for so long, we would all know a lot about the ways juries differ from judges in their behavior. In fact, we know remarkably little. This Article provides the first large-scale comparison of plaintiff win rates and recoveries in civil cases tried before juries and judges. In two of the most controversial areas of modern tort law--product liability and medical malpractice--the win rates substantially differ from other cases' win …
Settling For A Judge: A Comment On Clermont And Eisenberg, Samuel R. Gross
Settling For A Judge: A Comment On Clermont And Eisenberg, Samuel R. Gross
Articles
Trial by Jury or Judge: Transcending Empiricism,1 by Kevin Clermont and Theodore Eisenberg, is not only an important article, it is unique. To most Americans, trial means trial by jury. In fact, over half of all federal trials are conducted without juries2 (including 31% of trials in cases in which the parties have the right to choose a jury3), and the proportion of bench trials in state courts is even higher.4 And yet, while there is a large literature on the outcomes of jury trials and the factors that affect them,5 nobody else has systematically compared trials by jury to …
The Noseworthy Doctrine: A Threepart Rule For Its Application, Steven D. Jannace
The Noseworthy Doctrine: A Threepart Rule For Its Application, Steven D. Jannace
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
State Medical Malpractice Screening Panels In Federal Diversity Actions, Vincent C. Alexander
State Medical Malpractice Screening Panels In Federal Diversity Actions, Vincent C. Alexander
Faculty Publications
During the early 1970's, a medical malpractice crisis was perceived in the United States. An increasing number of costly and time-consuming lawsuits alleging medical malpractice against doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers caused malpractice insurers to raise premiums substantially, which in turn threatened to curtail the availability of adequate health care at reasonable cost. State legislatures responded to the crisis with a variety of substantive and procedural measures intended to reduce the number of litigated claims and the size of jury awards. One of the principal steps taken in a majority of states was the creation of extrajudicial panels …
Statute Of Limitations In Malpractice Actions, Ernest A. Cieslinski
Statute Of Limitations In Malpractice Actions, Ernest A. Cieslinski
Cleveland State Law Review
The ill-treated patient has sought redress for medical malpractice by actions that sound in tort, in contract, or in fraud. As with other actions, the underlying policy of "peace and repose" of all statutes of limitations dictates that these actions be timely. In Ohio, for example, the time limit for an action for malpractice is one year.
Huffman V. Lindquist [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Huffman V. Lindquist [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Nonsuits were properly granted to a doctor and hospital in a malpractice and negligence action by the mother of a deceased son where there was insufficient evidence that actions of the doctor and hospital were the proximate cause of the son's death.