Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
TX Medical Board's Restrictions on Telemedicine Bring on Lawsuit
The Texas Medical Board (TMB) voted in April to alter the practice of telemedicine within the state, but although the Board announced that its rule changes would increase telemedicine opportunities, there is room for debate. (See TMB April 14 press release, “TMB Adopts Rules Expanding Telemedicine Opportunities,” http://bit.ly/1GhLyVu.) The term “telemedicine” refers to the practice of providing medical advice and care through telephone, videoconference or other electronic means. Texas's new rules allow patients to receive medical care through telemedicine if they have previously received an in-person diagnosis of their condition from the telemedicine care provider. In addition, a patient who has not been given an in-person diagnosis by the remote care provider may receive care through telemedicine if a second licensed medical care provider is present with the patient to assist the remote care provider. What will no longer be allowed? The new rules prohibit a telemedicine provider from treating a patient he or she has not diagnosed in person or, at lease, diagnosed when the patient was in the presence of another licensed medical care provider. Once one of these initial consultations has taken place, however, the need for a second care provider during a telemedicine consultation will no longer be required.
In response to the TMB's action, the telemedicine company, Teledoc, filed suit in late April accusing the TMB of breaking anti-trust laws by limiting physician/patient interactions as a means to squelch competition. “It is clear that the medical board acted only when Teladoc consultations became sufficiently numerous to be perceived as a competitive threat to brick-and-mortar physician practices,” said Jason Gorevic, Teladoc's chief executive officer in a release announcing the lawsuit. (See Teledoc's April 29 press release, “Teladoc moves to block Medical Board rule that would restrict health care access for millions of Texans,” http://bit.ly/1M6GgEx.) “We can't sit back and let a bad rule by the Texas Medical Board rob from millions of consumers and physicians the tremendous benefits of telehealth,” said Gorevic. “California, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia and dozens of other states have found solutions that embrace telehealth, and all of its benefits, while ensuring patient safety.”
'
NY Bill to Alter Med-Mal Limitations Period Progresses in Legislature
In June, New York's State Assembly passed a bill that would put New York in line with other states that allow medical malpractice victims to file lawsuits during a set period after they discover they have suffered injuries from malpractice. New York is currently alone in requiring such suits to be filed within 2 ' years of injury. This leaves many patients who have legitimate claims with no recourse, because they did not discover the cause of their injuries until years after they actually occurred. The bill (A285/S911) was sponsored in the Assembly by Helene Weinstein, D-Brooklyn, who said it was prompted by cases like that of Brooklynite Lavern Wilkinson, who died of lung cancer in 2013 at the age of 41. Her family claims that a 2010 medical examination missed the cancer. The proposed law would set the limitations period at 2 1/2 years from the time a person discovers that an actionable injury occurred.
'
TX Medical Board's Restrictions on Telemedicine Bring on Lawsuit
The Texas Medical Board (TMB) voted in April to alter the practice of telemedicine within the state, but although the Board announced that its rule changes would increase telemedicine opportunities, there is room for debate. (See TMB April 14 press release, “TMB Adopts Rules Expanding Telemedicine Opportunities,” http://bit.ly/1GhLyVu.) The term “telemedicine” refers to the practice of providing medical advice and care through telephone, videoconference or other electronic means. Texas's new rules allow patients to receive medical care through telemedicine if they have previously received an in-person diagnosis of their condition from the telemedicine care provider. In addition, a patient who has not been given an in-person diagnosis by the remote care provider may receive care through telemedicine if a second licensed medical care provider is present with the patient to assist the remote care provider. What will no longer be allowed? The new rules prohibit a telemedicine provider from treating a patient he or she has not diagnosed in person or, at lease, diagnosed when the patient was in the presence of another licensed medical care provider. Once one of these initial consultations has taken place, however, the need for a second care provider during a telemedicine consultation will no longer be required.
In response to the TMB's action, the telemedicine company, Teledoc, filed suit in late April accusing the TMB of breaking anti-trust laws by limiting physician/patient interactions as a means to squelch competition. “It is clear that the medical board acted only when Teladoc consultations became sufficiently numerous to be perceived as a competitive threat to brick-and-mortar physician practices,” said Jason Gorevic, Teladoc's chief executive officer in a release announcing the lawsuit. (See Teledoc's April 29 press release, “Teladoc moves to block Medical Board rule that would restrict health care access for millions of Texans,” http://bit.ly/1M6GgEx.) “We can't sit back and let a bad rule by the Texas Medical Board rob from millions of consumers and physicians the tremendous benefits of telehealth,” said Gorevic. “California, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky,
'
NY Bill to Alter Med-Mal Limitations Period Progresses in Legislature
In June,
'
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
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.