The Health Law Firm
FEBRUARY 28, 2013
Mote , 2012 MT 283, P.3d In a case of first impression, the Montana Supreme Court has joined courts from many other states in recognizing a cause of action for negligent credentialing of a physician. In Brookins v. 3d (not yet released for publication), an expectant mother hired an obstetrician who maintained a practice in his home.
The Health Law Firm
AUGUST 10, 2012
The Florida Board of Medicine voted to accept the voluntary relinquishment on Friday, August 3, 2012, according to a Lakeland Ledger article. Rather than risk having his license revoked in an administrative proceeding, the now former doctor offered to voluntarily relinquish his license. Click here to read the entire Lakeland Ledger article.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Drug & Device Law
DECEMBER 11, 2023
That started us thinking about other uses of severance of non-indispensable parties to preserve diversity – particularly, as in the Rejuvenate case, medical malpractice defendants in product liability litigation – to preserve federal diversity jurisdiction. We most recently returned to this issue here , where we discussed Sullivan v.
Drug & Device Law
APRIL 10, 2023
2012); Cole v. Right now, the schedule for the meeting has debate on the “Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Medical Malpractice & Miscellaneous Provisions” – which includes the medical monitoring proposal – set for Monday, May 22 at 10:30 a.m. Oklahoma : Taylor v. Michelin North America, Inc. 2018 WL 1569495, at *6-7 (N.D.
Drug & Device Law
AUGUST 8, 2022
Apparently, a fraudulent foreign-trained “doctor” treated the plaintiffs, none of whom claimed malpractice or any physical injury whatsoever. 2012 WL 3265002, at *5 (N.D. 8, 2012) (“For claims against trade associations in particular, public policy is ‘part of the legal mix’ and favors not imposing a duty.”); Lockman v.
Drug & Device Law
JUNE 6, 2022
They’re experienced at what they do and aren’t intimidated by plaintiffs’ counsel and their threats of malpractice claims if they don’t testify the way plaintiffs want them to. 2012), it had to apply the rule. procedure that existed at the time of [plaintiff’s] injury”; malpractice was “intervening cause”) (applying Kansas law); Eck v.
Drug & Device Law
MAY 9, 2022
We have posted twice before about decisions that reject duty-to-train claims under the rubric of “educational malpractice.” The claim against the flight school were dismissed because “Pennsylvania courts have not permitted cases of negligence resulting from alleged educational malpractice to persist.” 2012); Glorvigen v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
40 
Let's personalize your content