Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Last June, the AMA requested that state and federal agencies initiate investigations into the growing retail-based health clinics run by major pharmacies across the country. The Association claims that there are potential conflicts of interest at these clinics, because the primary goal is profit-making by luring patients to the pharmacy to fill the prescriptions written by the in-house health provider.
Recent happenings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
The U.S. Supreme Court in February tackled an issue that has come up frequently in lawsuits brought by plaintiffs claiming they've been injured by medical devices: Do the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 preempt state law-based claims against device manufacturers? The Court had partially answered the question in <i>Lohr v. Medtronic</i>, but the fact situation in that case did not necessarily make its decision applicable to other cases against medical devices manufacturers.
Last month, we discussed the fact that a recent decision by the California Court of Appeal explores the relationship between the doctrine of informed consent and the intentional tort of battery. The case was <i>Saxena v Goffney</i>. This is the conclusion of that discussion.
Features
Federal government attorneys recently unsuccessfully attempted to convince a Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to rewrite the terms of the Federal Tort Claims Act ('FTCA') to allow the creation of a reversionary trust rather than give a lump-sum award to pay for a medical malpractice plaintiff's future medical expenses.
Recent happenings of importance to you and your practice.