Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Verdicts
Hospital Remains in Suit After Court Finds Ostensible Agency
The Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas has denied summary judgment to a Pennsylvania hospital that claimed a patient could not reasonably have believed that a contracting physician accused of medical malpractice was a direct employee of the hospital. Oscarson v. Moses Taylor Hospital, PICS No. 16-0194.
The plaintiff, Nathan Oscarson, was seen at Moses Taylor Hospital by Dr. Michael Yoder, an employee of Pathology Associates of Northeastern Pennsylvania Ltd., which practices out of the hospital. Dr. Yoder performed a biopsy on a mass on Oscarson's neck, then determined that the mass was malignant. He recommended that Oscarson undergo a two-part surgical procedure, which he did. It was then discovered that the mass was not malignant. Oscarson sued the doctor and Moses Taylor Hospital for medical malpractice, claiming that the unnecessary surgical procedures he was subjected to left him permanently disfigured and in pain. Even though he learned that Yoder was not an employee of the hospital, he asserted that the doctor was the ostensible agent of the hospital, and that the facility was therefore responsible for the doctor's negligence.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
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?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.