Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Torts (12)
- Constitutional Law (6)
- Civil Procedure (4)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (4)
- Criminal Law (4)
-
- Disability Law (4)
- Evidence (4)
- Civil Law (3)
- Health Law and Policy (3)
- Insurance Law (3)
- Law and Society (3)
- Litigation (3)
- Criminal Procedure (2)
- Medicine and Health Sciences (2)
- Mental and Social Health (2)
- Psychiatric and Mental Health (2)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (2)
- Agency (1)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Estates and Trusts (1)
- Family Law (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Law and Philosophy (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Law and Psychology (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Keyword
-
- Medical malpractice (8)
- Physicians (6)
- Torts (4)
- Evidence (3)
- Medical staff (3)
-
- Right to die (3)
- Disability (2)
- Discrimination (2)
- Doctors (2)
- Hospitals (2)
- Liability (2)
- Medical Jurisprudence (2)
- Medical procedures (2)
- Negligence (2)
- Psychiatry (2)
- Right to be let alone (2)
- Screening panel (2)
- Statute of limitations (2)
- ADA (1)
- Ada (1)
- Admissibility (1)
- Affidavits (1)
- Agency (1)
- Aids (1)
- Allopathic (1)
- Americans with disabilities act (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Assisted suicide (1)
- Attachment (1)
- Best interests (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 28 of 28
Full-Text Articles in Medical Jurisprudence
Informed Consent In Maine: Woolley V. Henderson And The Informed Consent Statute, John C. Milazzo
Informed Consent In Maine: Woolley V. Henderson And The Informed Consent Statute, John C. Milazzo
Maine Law Review
In recent years, American courts have used two different standards in informed consent actions to define the scope of a physician's duty to disclose to his patient the risks inherent in a proposed medical procedure—the professional disclosure standard and the material-risk standard. In Woolley v. Henderson, the Maine Law Court expressly adopted the professional disclosure standard. Prior to the Law Court's decision, however, but after the cause of action in Woolley arose, the Maine Legislature enacted the Maine informed consent statute. Justice Glassman's opinion in Woolley expressly declined to construe the statute. The continued relevance of Woolley to similar cases …
Hospital Accountability In Health Care Delivery, C. Elisabeth Belmont
Hospital Accountability In Health Care Delivery, C. Elisabeth Belmont
Maine Law Review
In recent years, the role of community hospitals in health care delivery has undergone a dramatic change. Until the latter half of the twentieth century, a hospital was merely a "doctor's workshop," providing physicians with the physical facilities, equipment, and personnel necessary to treat their private patients. Due to progressive medical technology, today's hospital has moved from a passive role in patient care to more active participation in the delivery of total health care. The hospital has become a health care provider in its own right, furnishing a broad range of diagnostic and outpatient services, home care assistance, and specialized …
Antitrust Scrutiny Of The Medical Staff Plan, Cynthia Teresa Churchill
Antitrust Scrutiny Of The Medical Staff Plan, Cynthia Teresa Churchill
Maine Law Review
Advances in medical technology over the past 50 years have made access to a hospital, its medical staff, and the support facilities and equipment it provides essential for many physicians. Until recently it was not difficult for a qualified physician to obtain staff privileges. In recent years, however, an increasing number of hospital governing boards across the United States have begun to design and implement what are known as "medical staff plans." The often-stated purpose of these plans is to alleviate hospital overcrowding and unstructured staff growth by applying an ordered approach to future medical staff growth, taking into account …
Burns V. Smith: Assessing The Sufficiency Of Affidavits Supporting Prejudgment Attachments In Medical Malpractice Actions, Margaret Christie Kenney
Burns V. Smith: Assessing The Sufficiency Of Affidavits Supporting Prejudgment Attachments In Medical Malpractice Actions, Margaret Christie Kenney
Maine Law Review
The process of attachment allows a plaintiff to request that the court bring a defendant's property into the court's custody for the purpose of satisfying any subsequent judgment that the plaintiff may obtain. In Maine, a plaintiff may proceed either with notice to the defendant or ex parte. In order to proceed ex parte, by which only the plaintiff appears before the court without notice to the defendant, the plaintiff must satisfy the requirements of Rule 4A of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 4A embodies two distinct safeguards for defendants whose property a plaintiff seeks to attach ex …
Improved Regulation Of Maine Physicians: One Solution To The Medical Malpractice Crisis, Joanne Buttolph Steneck
Improved Regulation Of Maine Physicians: One Solution To The Medical Malpractice Crisis, Joanne Buttolph Steneck
Maine Law Review
Maine began regulating allopathic and osteopathic physicians around the turn of the century with the passage of two statutes, in 1895 and 1919, commonly referred to as the Medical Practice Acts. As originally enacted, these statutes provided for the establishment of boards, composed of physicians, and empowered the boards to examine and license all persons seeking to practice as physicians and surgeons within the state. The boards were also responsible for investigating complaints of noncompliance with, or violations of, the Acts' provisions, and for revoking licenses for such violations. The boards were left to undertake these licensing and review functions …
Ending The Never-Ending Medical Malpractice Crisis, Allen Redlich
Ending The Never-Ending Medical Malpractice Crisis, Allen Redlich
Maine Law Review
Another nationwide outbreak of what is commonly called the medical malpractice "crisis" is spreading. Once again, as during prior episodes, the public hears of dramatic increases in the cost of malpractice insurance, of growing numbers of multimillion dollar awards, and of increases in the number of suits filed. Already several states have passed statutes in attempts to resolve the crisis. This crisis atmosphere resembles the crisis of the mid-seventies when every state enacted so-called "remedial" statutes, which failed to solve the crisis. A physician would define a "crisis" as a turning point in the course of a disease; nonmedical definitions …
In Re Debra B.: The Best Interest Standard In Court-Authorized Sterilization Of The Mentally Retarded, Sheila M. Donahue
In Re Debra B.: The Best Interest Standard In Court-Authorized Sterilization Of The Mentally Retarded, Sheila M. Donahue
Maine Law Review
Pursuant to the Due Process in Sterilization Act of 1982, Maine courts may hear petitions for sterilization of the mentally retarded. In In re Debra B., a mother petitioned to have her mentally retarded daughter sterilized. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, vacated the order granting the petition. In a unanimous opinion, the court held that a finding of procreative capability is a sine qua non for determining whether sterilization is in an incompetent person's best interest. Through its holding, the court thereby extended the statute's clear and convincing standard of proof to a factor not …
Maine's Living Will Act And The Termination Of Life-Sustaining Medical Procedures, Eric R. Herlan
Maine's Living Will Act And The Termination Of Life-Sustaining Medical Procedures, Eric R. Herlan
Maine Law Review
The Maine Legislature recently enacted a law authorizing the execution and use of living wills. The execution of a living will, essentially a document of "informed consent," allows a person to preserve in a legally recognized form his desire that, once he has been diagnosed to have a terminal medical condition and is no longer competent to make treatment decisions, the doctor should discontinue all life-sustaining procedures. With the passage of this act, Maine has joined thirty-four other states and the District of Columbia in enacting living will provisions. In addition, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws …
Joy V. Eastern Maine Medical Center: Extension Of A Physician's Duty To Third Parties, Timothy H. Norton
Joy V. Eastern Maine Medical Center: Extension Of A Physician's Duty To Third Parties, Timothy H. Norton
Maine Law Review
In Joy v. Eastern Maine Medical Center, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that a claimant may sue a physician to recover damages for injuries that were caused by a negligently treated patient. The Law Court focused its analysis on the concept of duty and reasoned that a physician's duty to his patient extends to third parties whose injuries are a foreseeable result of negligent treatment. The Joy case sets forth a broad rule that provides a new and untested means of recovery against physicians and hospitals. This Note examines the new rule against the …
Maine Recognizes The Independent Tort Of Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress: Gammon V. Osteopathic Hospital, Jaye E. Rooney
Maine Recognizes The Independent Tort Of Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress: Gammon V. Osteopathic Hospital, Jaye E. Rooney
Maine Law Review
Gerald Gammon opened his deceased father's hospital bag, expecting to find his personal effects. Instead, he discovered a bloodied leg, severed below the knee and bluish in color. Recoiling in horror, he yelled, "Oh my God, they have taken my father's leg off.” His aunt later recalled at trial that "he was as white as a ghost" and she thought he was going to have a heart attack. Gerald received a call on November 7, 1982, from the Osteopathic Hospital of Maine informing him that his father, Linwood Gammon, had succumbed to cancer that morning. A funeral home employee picked …
In Re Gardner: Withdrawing Medical Care From Persistently Vegetative Patients, John K. Veroneau
In Re Gardner: Withdrawing Medical Care From Persistently Vegetative Patients, John K. Veroneau
Maine Law Review
As medical science and technology progress, the distinction between traditional notions of life and death becomes increasingly blurred. Persons in dire medical conditions, lacking all cognitive and sensory abilities, may now be kept "alive" for indefinite periods of time. In the seminal case of In re Quinlan, a court was first asked whether it was ever legally permissible to withhold or withdraw life-preserving care from a persistently vegetative person. Since In re Quinlan, the courts of many states, including Maine, have confronted this issue. In In re Gardner, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, affirmed a …
Milton V. Cary Medical Center: A Viable Fetus Is Not A Person Under Maine's Wrongful Death Statute, Stan Piecuch
Milton V. Cary Medical Center: A Viable Fetus Is Not A Person Under Maine's Wrongful Death Statute, Stan Piecuch
Maine Law Review
In Milton v. Cary Medical Center, a sharply divided Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, refused to recognize a right of action for the wrongful death of a viable fetus. The court held that a viable fetus is not a person for purposes of applying Maine's wrongful death statute and that, consequently, the mother of a stillborn child could not maintain an action for the child's death. The court determined that the legislative history of the statute indicated that the Legislature did not intend the remedy to apply in the case of a child not born alive. …
Withdrawal Of Life-Sustaining Treatment: Patients' Rights—Privacy Rights, Patricia Lerwick
Withdrawal Of Life-Sustaining Treatment: Patients' Rights—Privacy Rights, Patricia Lerwick
Maine Law Review
As medical expertise and technologies improve, many patients who would otherwise die of their illnesses or injuries survive. For many of these patients and their families, the knowledge and therapies that save their lives are a blessing. Unfortunately for some, survival means not recovery, but rather a severely limited existence dependent on some form of life-sustaining treatment, such as a ventilator or feeding tube. For some of these patients, such an existence is not a blessing, but a curse, not a triumph over death, but rather a cruel prolonging of their dying. These patients, or their families, seek to have …
After A.S.: Proposals To Alleviate Psychiatric Boarding In Maine, Meredith K. Cook
After A.S.: Proposals To Alleviate Psychiatric Boarding In Maine, Meredith K. Cook
Maine Law Review
When someone presents to an emergency room with a mental illness manifesting in danger to themselves or others, they can be admitted against their will on an emergency basis to inpatient mental health care through a process colloquially known as a Blue Paper application. However, when an inpatient bed is not immediately available, patients are “boarded” against their will in emergency rooms with little to no therapeutic care, sometimes for several weeks at a time before they are transferred to inpatient care, or their condition stabilizes enough for them to be discharged into the community. In February 2020, a man …
Patient Decision Aids Improve Patient Safety And Reduce Medical Liability Risk, Thaddeus Mason Pope
Patient Decision Aids Improve Patient Safety And Reduce Medical Liability Risk, Thaddeus Mason Pope
Maine Law Review
Tort-based doctrines of informed consent have utterly failed to assure that patients understand the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the healthcare they receive. Fifty years of experience with the doctrine of informed consent have shown it to be an abject catastrophe. Most patients lack an even minimal understanding of their treatment options. But there is hope. Substantial evidence shows that patient decision aids (PDAs) and shared decision making can bridge the gap between the theory and practice of informed consent. These evidence-based educational tools empower patients to make decisions with significantly more knowledge and less decisional conflict than clinician-patient discussions …
Termination Of Hospital Medical Staff Privileges For Economic Reasons: An Appeal For Consistency, June D. Zellers, Michael R. Poulin
Termination Of Hospital Medical Staff Privileges For Economic Reasons: An Appeal For Consistency, June D. Zellers, Michael R. Poulin
Maine Law Review
The relationship between physicians and hospitals is undergoing significant change. Historically, a physician maintained a private practice in the community and looked to the local hospital for ancillary support when his or her patients were too ill to remain at home. This community-based physician gained access to the hospital by obtaining medical staff privileges. These privileges allowed the physician to admit patients to the hospital, treat patients while they were there, and use the hospital's staff and equipment. The physician generally enjoyed the use of the privileges throughout his or her active career, losing them only if found incompetent. Today, …
Maine Physician Practice Guidelines: Implications For Medical Malpractice Litigation, Jennifer S. Begel
Maine Physician Practice Guidelines: Implications For Medical Malpractice Litigation, Jennifer S. Begel
Maine Law Review
This Article assesses the use of physician practice guidelines as a vehicle for medical malpractice tort reform and focuses upon the State of Maine's legislation incorporating physician practice parameters into the defense of medical malpractice litigation. The Maine Medical Liability Demonstration Project (the “Demonstration Project”) legislatively adopts practice guidelines in four different medical specialties and allows physicians in those specialties to assert compliance with the applicable guideline as an affirmative defense. The affirmative defense of compliance with such guidelines has been touted as a means of protecting physicians from, and decreasing the costs associated with, medical malpractice litigation. While the …
Expert Testimony And Professional Licensing Boards: What Is Good, What Is Necessary, And The Myth Of The Majority-Minority Split, Timothy P. Mccormack
Expert Testimony And Professional Licensing Boards: What Is Good, What Is Necessary, And The Myth Of The Majority-Minority Split, Timothy P. Mccormack
Maine Law Review
Defendants regularly argue that a Review Board's decision must be overturned because it is not supported by expert testimony. Boards counter that they are qualified, by virtue of their role as the guardians of the standards for their profession, to determine the appropriateness of a defendant's conduct without the assistance of expert testimony. When courts address these arguments, they routinely ask if expert testimony is necessary to establish the standard of care in disciplinary hearings before a professional licensing board. Courts answer this question differently. In fact there is a seeming schism among the states about the importance of expert …
Latent Medical Errors And Maine's Statute Of Limitations For Medical Malpractice: A Discussion Of The Issues, Kathryn M. Kendall
Latent Medical Errors And Maine's Statute Of Limitations For Medical Malpractice: A Discussion Of The Issues, Kathryn M. Kendall
Maine Law Review
Each year in the United States, between 44,000 and 98,000 hospitalized patients die as a result of medical errors. Nearly a third of such errors are caused by negligence. Although most of these negligent mistakes become apparent to patients or their families shortly after they occur, a few remain undiscoverable for an extended length of time. When medical errors lead to the misdiagnosis of diseases with long latency periods, patients may be delayed in obtaining appropriate treatment. Nonetheless, in Maine, because medical malpractice actions are governed by a strict occurrence-based statute of limitations as opposed to a limitations period that …
Hiv And The Ada: What Is A Direct Threat?, Dawn-Marie Harmon
Hiv And The Ada: What Is A Direct Threat?, Dawn-Marie Harmon
Maine Law Review
Anne, a surgical technician at a local hospital, recently learned that she was HIV-positive. She works in the emergency room and, as a part of her job, she hands surgical instruments to doctors performing emergency surgery. It is a fast paced and unpredictable environment. Her hands often come in contact with sharp instruments. Although Anne has never put her hands into a patient's body cavity, there is a remote possibility that she may need to do so in the future. There is always a possibility, however small, that she will cut herself and come into blood-to-blood contact with a doctor …
Conant V. Walters: A Misapplication Of Free Speech Rights In The Doctor-Patient Relationship, Katharine M. Mccarthy
Conant V. Walters: A Misapplication Of Free Speech Rights In The Doctor-Patient Relationship, Katharine M. Mccarthy
Maine Law Review
In Conant v. Walters, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed the application of the First Amendment's right of free speech to a federal policy that prohibited the recommendation of medical marijuana by physicians. This class action suit, brought by physicians and severely ill patients, successfully enjoined the federal government from enforcing its policy revoking the federal prescriptive licenses of physicians who recommend or approve of marijuana use by patients suffering from certain severe illnesses. The federal government's policy, issued in 1996 through a statement of Barry McCaffrey, director of the Office of National Drug Control …
Negligence Per Se Theories In Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation, Andrew E. Costa
Negligence Per Se Theories In Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation, Andrew E. Costa
Maine Law Review
The notion of addressing the vagaries of negligence per se theories in the context of pharmaceutical and medical device litigation seems to promise little more than a monograph anesthetized by a body of obscure pharmaceutical and medical device provisions viewed through the lenses of various states' negligence law. Maybe little more than that can be assured. However, the issue of how courts should address negligence per se theories in this context implicates a variety of “larger” (or, possibly, more interesting) legal issues in general and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation in particular. Perhaps foremost among these issues is the interaction …
Unconstitutional Asymmetry Or A Rational Basis For Inconsistency? The Admissibility Of Medical Malpractice Prelitigation Screening Panel Findings Before And After Smith V. Hawthorne I And Ii, Matthew Asnault Morris
Unconstitutional Asymmetry Or A Rational Basis For Inconsistency? The Admissibility Of Medical Malpractice Prelitigation Screening Panel Findings Before And After Smith V. Hawthorne I And Ii, Matthew Asnault Morris
Maine Law Review
Pre-litigation screening panels have been instrumental in streamlining medical malpractice litigation in the State of Maine by culling claims from superior court dockets, encouraging settlements, and providing findings of fact that could prove useful for a jury if the case proceeds to trial. In enacting one particular provision governing the confidentiality and the admissibility of the screening panel process, however, the legislature may have sacrificed the constitutional rights of medical malpractice claimants in favor of a lighter docket. Two recent cases before the Law Court, Smith I and II, have challenged the constitutionality of Maine’s unique statutory approach to the …
Retributive Medication: A Discussion Of A Maine Law Allowing Involuntary, Forcible Medication Of A Pretrial Defendant For The Purpose Of Rendering The Defendant Competent To Stand Trial, Ashley T. Perry
Maine Law Review
Innocent until proven guilty—it’s a phrase we have all heard, know, and accept. But there are circumstances where this simple concept is strained in its application, such as when a legally incompetent defendant is facing trial. After all, how can a defendant be proven guilty if he cannot stand trial? The Supreme Court of the United States has determined that forcibly medicating an incompetent defendant solely to render the defendant competent to stand trial is permissible under the Federal Constitution. However, the Federal Constitution provides only the floor-level of civil rights; states are free to set their own ceilings. The …
Dangerous Diagnoses, Risky Assumptions, And The Failed Experiment Of "Sexually Violent Predator" Commitment, Deirdre M. Smith
Dangerous Diagnoses, Risky Assumptions, And The Failed Experiment Of "Sexually Violent Predator" Commitment, Deirdre M. Smith
Faculty Publications
In its 1997 opinion, Kansas v. Hendricks, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a law that reflected a new model of civil commitment. The targets of this new commitment law were dubbed “Sexually Violent Predators” (SVPs), and the Court upheld indefinite detention of these individuals on the assumption that there is a psychiatrically distinct class of individuals who, unlike typical recidivists, have a mental condition that impairs their ability to refrain from violent sexual behavior. And, more specifically, the Court assumed that the justice system could reliably identify the true “predators,” those for whom this unusual and extraordinary deprivation of liberty …
Diagnosing Liability : The Legal History Of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Deirdre M. Smith
Diagnosing Liability : The Legal History Of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Deirdre M. Smith
Faculty Publications
This Article examines the origins of the unique relationship between the psychiatric diagnosis Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and the law and considers the implications of that relationship for contemporary uses of the diagnosis in legal settings. PTSD stands apart from all other diagnoses in psychiatry 's standard classification system, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM} , and is the focus of significant controversy within psychiatry, because its diagnostic criteria require a determination of causation. By diagnosing a person with PTSD, a clinician necessarily assigns responsibility to a specific event or agent for causing the person 's symptoms, …
An Uncertain Privilege: Implied Waiver And The Eviseration Of The Psychotherapist Patient Privilege In The Federal Courts, Deirdre M. Smith
An Uncertain Privilege: Implied Waiver And The Eviseration Of The Psychotherapist Patient Privilege In The Federal Courts, Deirdre M. Smith
Faculty Publications
Twelve years ago in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996), the United States Supreme Court first recognized a federal common law psychotherapist-patient privilege and held that federal courts must protect confidential communications arising in psychotherapy despite the "likely evidentiary benefit" of such communications. This article examines the sharply conflicting authority in the federal courts that has developed since that landmark decision on the question of whether a plaintiff to a civil lawsuit waives the psychotherapist-patient privilege merely by seeking emotional distress damages. The federal courts' inconsistent and unprincipled approaches to this question renders the privilege itself nearly illusory and …
Who Says You're Disabled? The Role Of Medical Evidence In The Ada Definition Of Disability, Deirdre M. Smith
Who Says You're Disabled? The Role Of Medical Evidence In The Ada Definition Of Disability, Deirdre M. Smith
Faculty Publications
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted by Congress seventeen years ago, offered disabled people a hope of equality and access that has not been fulfilled. 1 Court decisions halt an overwhelming majority of claims, particularly in the employment context, at the summary judgment stage. 2 A key mechanism for fencing out disabled people's claims is the pernicious requirement, based upon the very construction of disability that the ADA's proponents aimed to dispel, that medical evidence is required as a threshold matter to demonstrate that the plaintiff is entitled to seek protection under the statute. 3 The medical evidence requirement …