Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Features

Movers & Shakers

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Who's going where; who's doing what.

Verdicts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

Drug & Device News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent news from this important area.

Features

Med Mal News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

The latest news you need to know.

When Products Liability Intersects with Malpractice Strategy

Lori G. Cohen & Sara K. Thompson

When physicians and hospitals find themselves defending a medical malpractice case that has been intertwined with product liability claims against a medical device manufacturer, these may seem like uncharted waters as compared with litigation solely involving multiple physician or hospital defendants. But the same general principle governs both scenarios: Defendants are likely to fare better when they hold hands and play nicely together for as long as possible and present a united front to plaintiffs.

Features

Localized Pain

Tresa Baldas

A movement is slowly building to abolish century-old medical malpractice laws that judge a doctors' performance by the medical standards existing in his or her community. Those laws, known as 'locality rules,' are still on the books in 21 states.

Document, Document, Document!

Barry B. Cepelewicz & Gary S. Sastow

Typically, health-care providers approach documentation with the goal of effectively communicating with themselves. The reality, however, is that depending upon many different circumstances, numerous other individuals may one day review a health-care provider's records for many different purposes and from many different perspectives.

Negotiating a Medicaid Lien

Jane M. Fearn-Zimmer

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court limited reimbursement of Medicaid liens to the fraction of the total recovery that corresponds to medical expenses. <i>Arkansas Department of Health and Human Services et al. v. Ahlborn</i>, 547 U.S. 268 (2006). Measures can be taken, however, that dramatically limit government liens, preserving recoveries to enrich the quality of life of a severely disabled individual.

Verdicts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

Features

Med Mal News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

What's new and noteworthy.

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

  • Navigating the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine in Bankruptcy
    When a company declares bankruptcy, avoidance actions under Chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code can assist in securing extra cash for the debtor's dwindling estate. When a debtor-in-possession does not pursue these claims, creditors' committees often seek the bankruptcy court's authorization to pursue them on behalf of the estate. Once granted such authorization through a “standing order,” a creditors' committee is said to “stand in the debtor's shoes” because it has permission to litigate certain claims belonging to the debtor that arose before bankruptcy. However, for parties whose cases advance to discovery, such a standing order may cause issues by leaving undecided the allocation of attorney-client privilege and work product protection between the debtor and committee.
    Read More ›
  • 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 ›