Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Medical Care or General Negligence?

By Janice G. Inman
August 01, 2016

When an injury occurs in a medical setting, the correct means of bringing suit to compensate the plaintiff may be a medical malpractice claim. On the other hand, it may be more appropriate to assert general negligence. The difference could prove crucial even though both causes of action require showings of a duty, its breach, causation and damages.

One such difference is many states' requirement that plaintiffs obtain an expert opinion before they may file a claim. Another important difference between medical malpractice and general negligence claims is the time period allowed between injury and the filing of the lawsuit; many state legislatures have lengthened or shortened the statute of limitations in medical malpractice cases, so that a suit for medical malpractice must be filed sooner (or may be filed later) than one for general negligence.

The stakes can be high. For example, in a state in which a medical malpractice claim must be brought within one year of injury while one for negligence may be filed up to two years after the incident in question, if the plaintiff gets it wrong and files a timely negligence claim that the court later deems to be an untimely medical malpractice claim, he's out in the cold. And if a plaintiff brings suit under a general negligence theory and, because it is not a medical malpractice claim, fails to provide the court with an expert's affidavit, the whole case may implode. Thus, courts have been asked repeatedly to settle the question ' was it medical malpractice or general negligence?

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance 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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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 Image

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.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

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.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?