Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

After 100 Years, Hospital Liability Takes a Sharp Turn

By Mary-Christine Sungaila and Lisa Perrochet
May 01, 2003

You are ordinarily not liable for the misdeeds of others, right? Sure, you can be vicariously liable for certain conduct of employees and agents, but not others you may associate with, such as independent contractors. Except sometimes. And now, if you're a hospital that allows independent contractor physicians to treat patients at your facility, “sometimes” is presumptively “all the time.” That is the rule laid down in the recent decision, Mejia v. Community Hospital of San Bernardino (2002), 99 Cal.App.4th 1448.

Mejia has taken a sharp right turn off the path hospital liability jurisprudence has taken over the last century. In fact, a treatise last year discussing hospitals' direct liability for acts of independent, non-salaried doctors reported, “So far there is no recorded case in California where such liability has been imposed because of the acts of a medical doctor.” (1 MacDonald, Cal. Medical Malpractice: Law and Practice (2001 supp.) Ostensible Agency, ' 4.20.) Mejia blazes a new trail in this area by imposing such liability under the doctrine of “ostensible agency,” a legal fiction that has been created to impose vicarious liability for injuries caused by someone who is not a “real” agent of the defendant, but is nonetheless treated as the defendant's agent for public policy reasons.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.