Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
There are two types of spoliation of evidence in medical negligence litigation: physical and content. Physical spoliation of evidence occurs where the tortfeasor physically destroys evidence or in some way makes the evidence unavailable. For example, there's the “shredder effect,” where the record is physically destroyed. Or the record can be left on the Risk Manager's desk until the day prior to trial. In either event, there is no physical record.
Content spoliation occurs when a health care provider places “spin” on the content of the medical record, creating an untruthful impression of the health care rendered. The general rule is that a provider must create a medical record that truthfully and accurately depicts the medical care rendered. See, Elliott B. Oppenheim, “The Medical Record As Evidence,” ' 4-8(a) (Lexis 1998) with cumulative Supplement 2003.
The Liebig-Grigsby Case
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?