Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For a physician or other health care defendant, being sued for medical malpractice is stressful. The saving grace for many is the financial safety net of liability insurance to cushion the blow and avoid monetary ruin for a physician or hospital. However, every net ' including a safety net ' has holes. Health care defendants can learn, often too late, that they face unexpected insurance coverage headaches. Being aware of these problems before a crisis erupts can arm the practitioner to perhaps avoid facing such traps during the lifespan of a malpractice claim.
This article's purpose is to spotlight potential insurance coverage tripwires that can exist in medical malpractice litigation. The aim is to empower physicians, other health care professionals and those who provide legal counsel to them to sidestep insurance coverage problems that can hamstring effective defense or be an expensive distraction during litigation. These observations flow from the author's experience as a claims professional and 30-plus years of handling medical liability claims. The views here do not constitute legal advice, but rather risk management observations and practice tips for health care defendants and those who represent them.
Let's examine some common insurance coverage pitfalls that can arise in the midst of a medical malpractice claim or lawsuit.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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.
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.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.