Law Commons^™

“With Friends Like These . . . .” Doctors And Nurses Criticizing Co-Employed Colleagues. Are These Criticisms Admissible As Vicarious Opposing Party’S Statements?, Marc D. Ginsberg

Saint Louis University Law Journal

Healthcare provider incivility includes non-collegial conduct such as physicians criticizing co-employed physicians when speaking with patients. This conduct is, obviously, disruptive, and does not help to establish productive, collegial, employee relationships.

Additionally, this incivility may have evidentiary consequences in medical/hospital negligence litigation. If the healthcare providers are employed by a hospital or other healthcare organization, the criticisms of co-employed colleagues which are communicated to patients may be admissible against the employer in medical/hospital negligence litigation as vicarious opposing party’s statements. This paper explores this evidentiary curiosity.

It Takes Two: Professional Interconnections And Potential Collaborations Between Small-Town Family Attorneys And Couple/Family Therapists, Wendy Lenk Mcclary

Antioch University Full-Text Dissertations & Theses

Attorneys who specialize in family practice may experience significant rates of mood disorders and substance reliance. Law schools typically do not provide supportive coursework or mentoring to help students learn to manage their feelings and those of crisis-impacted clients. Lawyers may well consider that understanding emotional needs and providing emotional support does not fall within their codes of practice. Societal stigma may prevent family attorneys and their clients from seeking therapy. Small-town attorneys may be particularly vulnerable to professional stress and safety concerns. The purpose of this study was to explore and understand the lived experiences of family attorneys practicing …

Business Entities - Basic Legal Issues, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

Brief introduction to certain business litigation issues including vicarious liability, sealing records, representation by counsel, qualification of domestic corporations; depositions of persons most knowledgeable, and conflicts of laws.

Contributory Infringers And Good Samaritans, Mark Bartholomew

Journal Articles

The introduction of online technologies has put increased pressure on the doctrine of contributory infringement as intellectual property rights holders switch their attention from direct infringers to Internet intermediaries. The Supreme Court has instructed lower courts to evaluate contributory infringement in light of traditional tort law. The common law of aiding and abetting, however, is so inconsistent as to offer no real guidance. A better approach lies in a separate but related area of tort doctrine. In a limited number of circumstances, tort law recognizes a duty to protect third parties from the actions of others. Like aiding and abetting, …

Copyright, Trademark And Secondary Liability After Grokster, Mark Bartholomew

Journal Articles

Even though secondary infringement doctrine in both copyright and trademark stems from the same common law starting points, the doctrines have moved in very different directions, particularly in the last decade. As copyright litigants expanded their litigation strategy to include online intermediaries, secondary copyright liability was stretched to encompass a wider array of defendants with increasingly tangential relationships to the direct infringer. Meanwhile, even though similar online threats jeopardized the ability of trademark holders to safeguard their brands' goodwill, courts refused to implement a similar expansion for secondary trademark liability. Although courts are aware of this doctrinal double standard, they …

Cops, Robbers, And Search Engines: The Questionable Role Of Criminal Law In Contributory Infringement Doctrine, Mark Bartholomew

Journal Articles

Online technologies have created a new litigation locus for intellectual property rights holders, one that targets intermediaries, not direct infringers. This unprecedented litigation strategy has put sudden pressure on the courts to evaluate the liability of indirect infringers. Without a developed body of precedent at their disposal, judges have resorted to analogies from the criminal law of accomplice liability to set the boundaries of contributory infringement. Does it make sense for intellectual property regulation to depend on the same principles that animate criminal law? This Article maintains that it would be a mistake to remake contributory infringement law in criminal …

The Secret Life Of Legal Doctrine: The Divergent Evolution Of Secondary Liability In Trademark And Copyright Law, Mark Bartholomew, John Tehranian

Journal Articles

The recent explosion in intellectual property litigation has witnessed increasing recourse to secondary liability theories. The courts have responded favorably to plaintiffs by enunciating substantial reinterpretations of extant principles, thereby precipitating a veritable secondary liability revolution. Numerous commentators have bemoaned this trend, contending that judicial recasting of liability rules expands intellectual property rights beyond their intended scope, thereby resulting in an overprotective regime that stifles innovation. Yet one of the most striking aspects of the secondary liability revolution has been all but ignored in the literature: While the courts have broadened the scope of secondary liability principles with respect to …

Recent Decisions - State And Federal: Growth Of Vicarious Liability Checked, John Jeffrey Ross

University of Baltimore Law Forum

No abstract provided.