Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Med Mal News
Another Health Care Worker Indicted for Stealing Opioids at Work
Several west-coast hospitals recently had the duty to inform thousands of patients that one of their former surgical technicians might have exposed those patients to Hepatitis B or C, or even HIV. The surgical technician in question, 28-year-old Rocky Allen, was allegedly seen taking a syringe full of fentanyl, a powerful synthetic opioid analgesic, off of an operating cart at Denver's Swedish Medical Center and replacing it with a syringe full of saline solution. Allen was indicted in February on charges of tampering with a consumer product and obtaining a controlled substance by deceit. At Swedish hospital alone, nearly 3,000 patients had to be told that Allen might have been present during their procedures and they should be tested for infection, though the likelihood of any one patient being affected is low.
In a hospital release (available at http://bit.ly/1Vr3V60), Richard A. Hammett, President and CEO of Swedish Medical Center, said, “We deeply regret that one of our former employees may have put patients at risk, and are sorry for any uncertainty or anxiety this may cause. Please know our first concern is the health, care, safety and privacy of our patients and we are working diligently to look after the wellbeing of the patients who may have been affected by the wrongful actions of this individual.” This is just the latest in a lengthening string of cases of addicted medical personnel stealing drugs ' often fentanyl ' from patients, exposing them to the possibility of disease and leaving them without the pain relief they need.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
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.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
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.