Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Developments in the medical malpractice arena.
In medical negligence litigation, one must understand exactly what went wrong, and when, before one may litigate a case. It is this microscopic attention that requires lawyers to dissect a case in minute detail that would inspire envy in a forensic pathologist. Unfortunately, the fact is that few physicians want to engage in such analysis. Once we understand the who, what, where, and when, however, 'why' becomes much more clear, thus leading to answers as to how future accidents and miscalculations can be prevented.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, 42 U.S.C.A. ' 1320(d) <i>et seq.</i> (HIPAA), was meant to offer a baseline for the disclosure of individual medical information. The law, calling for standards to be promulgated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, became effective in April 2001 and full compliance was required by April 2003. <i>Crenshaw v. Mony et al.</i>, 318 F. Supp. 2d 1015, 1027 (D.S.D. Cal. 2004). The regulations are hardly a model of clarity, even for federal regulations, and frequent reference to state law and state reporting agencies can heighten the confusion.
Features
On April 11, a jury in Atlantic City, NJ, ordered Merck & Co. to pay $9 million in punitive damages to a user of Vioxx, finding the drug maker knowingly withheld data from federal regulators about the painkiller's cardiovascular risks. Merck withdrew Vioxx from the market in 2004 when a study showed it doubled heart attack risk after 18 months of use. The Atlantic City trial was the first involving plaintiffs who had used Vioxx longer than that period of time.
Features
More than a million tissue transplants and medical device implants were performed in 2005, according to available estimates. It is reported that the organ and tissue transplantation market in the U.S. was valued at more than $11 billion in 2005. Today, the multi-billion-dollar biomedical industry continues to expand well beyond its more humble origins of blood, organ and tissue banking. These developing biotechnologies have forced courts to address novel issues and concerns regarding a new generation of biosurgical implants outside the parameters of settled judicial and statutory frameworks dealing with medical implants. The widespread usage of such new implants has also called into question the settled case law that hospitals and physicians may not be held strictly liable for the implantation of defective medical device products.
Features
Faced with rising litigation costs and unpredictable juries, it is understandable that many product liability litigants ' on both sides of the courtroom ' eventually think about settlement in lieu of trial. In cases involving catastrophic injury, however, staggering medical expense liens often control the feasibility of reaching an acceptable agreement. Some lawyers have long dreaded settlement negotiations when Medicare is the major lien holder, because Medicare can be the proverbial 800-pound gorilla at the table. Unfortunately, with the enactment of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MPDIMA) the gorilla has only gotten bigger. To have any chance at taming the Medicare beast, lawyers on both sides need to understand the reach of a Medicare lien, as well as potential avenues for reducing or eliminating Medicare's interest in the settlement proceeds.
Features
A well-intentioned journalist, who is not a physician, recently wrote an article in <i>The New York Times</i> asking why medical mistakes occur. There, the author advanced a theory that if doctors were better paid, there would be higher quality of care, and fewer misdiagnoses. This theory assumes that doctors are mainly motivated by money, which, in this author's opinion, is not the primary impetus for a doctor, or any other medical practitioner, to do the job right. The law defines medical negligence simply: the failure to do what a reasonably prudent practitioner would do in the same or similar circumstances. Medical negligence, in a legal sense, does not differ from other forms of negligence: When a person ' doctor or layman ' departs from the accepted standard of care, that is negligent conduct. Numerically, this vagary translates to mean that a practitioner has not deviated from the applicable standard of care if he or she does 'that which 51% of practitioners would do.'