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?
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
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.
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.
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.
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?