Features
Lawrie Demorest
&
Josh Becker
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, people from all walks of life and from all corners of the world want to reach out to do what they can to help the victims of this unfathomable disaster. Schoolchildren are raising pennies to help those in need while relief organizations send supplies from all regions of the country. On the ground where this disaster struck in Louisiana and Mississippi, however, thousands of caring individuals have been providing emergency first aid and medical care to their neighbors in need. When licensed health care workers respond to the urgent needs of the hurricane's victims, what kinds of liability might they be opening themselves up to?
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings you need to know.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
All the latest you need to know.
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Up-to-date news.
Features
Tim O'Brien
After Merck & Co.'s devastating loss in Texas earlier this month in the first Vioxx case to go to a jury, the nation's eyes now turn to Atlantic City, where New Jersey's first case was set for trial on Sept. 12.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Kristopher T. Wilson
As a practical matter, the decision of whether to settle claims brought against a policyholder is typically left to the insurer. The interests of the insurer and the policyholder are typically aligned, whether it is because of the policyholder's inherent desire to resolve the litigation, or the insurer's vastly greater experience in defending and settling claims. For claims falling within policy limits, however, there remains an enhanced possibility of a dispute between the policyholder and insurer over whether to settle. All litigation expenses will be borne by the insurer, as will the costs of any judgment. In contrast, continuing the litigation is a nominal cost for the policyholder. The policyholder may also have collateral interests at stake. In the most common of examples, a physician may wish to fight a malpractice claim rather than settle because of the potential damage to his or her professional reputation, a loss of business, an increase in future premiums, the potential termination of the policy, or impairment to his or her ability to obtain future coverage.
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
The latest news for you and your practice.
Features
David S. Klausner
... Ignorance of the process can turn a well-intentioned physician into a respondent in a physician misconduct proceeding. Since nothing threatens the foundation of a physician's practice more than the prospect of such a scenario, any contact from a representative of the state must be taken very seriously. Unfortunately, the combined effects of misinformation and misguided actions leave many physicians vulnerable to a procedure that can effectively strip them of their ability to earn a living. Learning the "who," "what," "why" and "how" of the process can hopefully keep you, your client or your client's staff members upstream of a problem and help ensure the continued viability of everyone's practice.
Janice G. Inman
Merck & Co., founded in 1891, has a slogan -- what it calls its "guiding philosophy." That philosophy is, "patients first." In the first of many Vioxx trials expected to be litigated in state and federal courts across the country, the jury wasn't buying it. On Aug. 19, after a month-long trial, ten out of 12 jurors -- the number needed to return a verdict of guilty -- found Merck liable to the plaintiffs, survivors of a man who took Vioxx for pain relief. The damages award was staggering: $24.5 million in economic losses and compensation for mental anguish and $229 million in punitive damages.
