Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Defining Death: A Call For The Reformation Of The Standard For Declaration Of Death In The Modern Era, Jayme M. Reisler
Defining Death: A Call For The Reformation Of The Standard For Declaration Of Death In The Modern Era, Jayme M. Reisler
Jayme M Reisler
Prior to the mid 20th century, a declaration of death was a relatively definite determination because the functioning of each vital organ was inextricably linked to the other. With the advent of the positive-pressure mechanical ventilator, however, came the loss of integration among these organ systems. The ability to maintain metabolic functioning of a patient as well as the ability to successfully transplant viable organs have given rise to a host of legal issues revolving around the determination of death. The main issue that arises is two fold. On one hand, such medical technology can prolong an individual’s life even …
Foreseeability Decoded, Meiring De Villiers
Foreseeability Decoded, Meiring De Villiers
Meiring de Villiers
The Article reviews the conceptual and doctrinal roles of the foreseeability doctrine in negligence law, and analyzes its application in cases where a new technology or unexplored scientific principle contributed to a plaintiff’s harm. It adopts the common law definition of foreseeability as a systematic relationship between a defendant’s wrongdoing and the plaintiff’s harm, and demonstrates translation of the concept into the language of science so that the common law meaning of the foreseeability doctrine is preserved. An analysis of the foreseeability of HIV/AIDS as a blood-borne risk illustrates application of the concept to contemporary issues in medical science.
Rebuttable Presumption Of Public Interest In Protecting The Public Health—The Necessity For Denying Injunctive Relief In Medically Related Patent Infringement Cases After Ebay V. Mercexchange, Lance E. Wyatt Jr.
Lance E Wyatt Jr.
The public’s interest in medicine and good health is substantial. However, this interest is harmed when important medical devices or pharmaceuticals, although infringing on valid patents, are suddenly taken off the market after a court grants a permanent injunction. While permanent injunctions were automatically granted by the Federal Circuit before the Supreme Court’s holding in eBay v. MercExchange, courts now have more discretion to deny injunctive relief. Now that courts have this newfound discretion after eBay, the public should no longer expect to be harmed by the sudden removal of medical supplies. Unfortunately, this has not been the course that …