Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Med Mal News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

A look at several recent news items.

Drug & Device News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

A look at several key cases.

Dangerous Patients and the Tarasoff Doctrine

Michael D. Brophy

Psychiatrists and other mental health practitioners must know the reporting laws in their own jurisdictions, and take the required steps under those laws, if they want to avoid liability when a patient follows through on a threat to harm someone else.

Medical Malpractice Claim or EMTALA Violation?

Janice G. Inman

What are the causes of action for an EMTALA claim? What constitutes an "adequate" screening, and how can a plaintiff show that the screening he or she received fell short?

Features

Medicare's 'Never Events' Should Never Be Mentioned in Court

Kim M. Ruder, Andrew W. Countryman & Alexandra Saber

Med Mal practitioners are questioning whether never events, and their related payment issues, is admissible into evidence at trial. What is the current state of the law, and what issues can we anticipate will come up in the future?

Columns & Departments

Verdicts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

An in-depth study of ruling of interest.

Columns & Departments

Drug & Device News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Review of the latest news.

Columns & Departments

Med Mal News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

A look at several recent news items.

Features

Foreseeable Harm to Third Parties Keeps Claim Against Drug Makers Alive

Janice G. Inman

Alabama's Supreme Court in January rendered a potentially far-reaching decision in a case pitting a consumer against drug manufacturers. While its holding applies only to cases brought in Alabama, the court's decision may lead to that state's becoming the preferred forum for certain types of drug litigation:

Features

Informed Consent and Res Ipsa Loquitur

Roseann Brenner & Elizabeth A. Syer

Two concepts that are mainstays of the medical malpractice arena are: 1) lack of informed consent; and 2) <I>res ipsa loquitu</I>r. Some plaintiffs may attempt to pursue these two theories in the same case. Is either of them ripe for dismissal?

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Revised Proposal: Understanding the Interagency Statement on Complex Structured Finance Activities
    Many U.S. financial institutions that have participated in equipment leasing transactions (particularly in the large-ticket and municipal markets) in the last 20 years will be keenly aware that as the structures grew ever more complicated, Congress and the federal regulatory agencies grew intensely interested. Whether the institution had a major role in the transaction or simply provided a service, some degree of scrutiny could be expected, often in conjunction with a tax audit of its client. The risks to financial institutions from participating in complex structured finance transactions of all types became a source for concern for banking and securities regulators. The principal federal regulators responded in 2004 with a proposal that financial institutions investigate, and bear responsibility for evaluating, the legal, tax, and accounting basis of their clients' complex structured finance transactions. The goal: to limit the institutions' own credit, legal, and reputational risk from such participation.
    Read More ›