Case Analysis : Medical Malpractice

This case is extremely relevant to what is known as the four D’s of negligence; duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages. Duty is when a doctor and a patient have formed a relationship and said doctor has taken on the responsibility of taking care of the patient. Dereliction or failure to perform a duty, there must be some kind of proof that the doctor somehow neglected the doctor neglected the patient. Direct cause, there must be some kind of proof that what happened to the patient was a direct cause of how the doctor conducted himself or his failure to act which resulted in injury. Damages a patient must prove that harm was incurred by the direct result of the physicians actions.

Medical malpractice lawsuits are an extremely serious topic and have affected numerous patients, doctors, and hospitals across the country. Medical malpractice is defined as “improper, unskilled or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or other health care professional” (Medical malpractice, n.d.). If a doctor acts negligent and causes harm to a patient, malpractice lawsuits arise. Negligence is the concept of the liability concerning claims of medical malpractice, making this type of litigation part of tort law. Tort law provides that one person may litigate negligence to recover damages for personal injury. Negligence laws are designed to deter careless behavior and also to

One of the problems with malpractice is that sometimes we have a hard time recognizing it. We may not know what exactly constitutes medical malpractice, or what qualifies as medical malpractice. Even worse, we often don't know what our course of action should

Charleston Community Memorial Hospital proved a corporate negligence doctrine in the case (Pozgar, 2013). The court found a jury could reasonably find negligence due to the fact that staff did not test for circulation as often as needed, it was concluded that skilled nurses would have been aware of circulation problems, informing attending staff promptly (Law School Case Briefs,2013). There was no argument that the defendant, the hospital in this case, failed to review physicians work, or require a consultation. A jury found that this failure was within reason to assume a negligent act was performed, or not performed in this case (Law School Case Briefs,2013). A person goes to a hospital and within reason expects the hospital to treat them (Pozgar, 2013). There is a legitimate basis in this case to hold the hospital vicariously responsible for torts of its employed staff (Law School Case Briefs,2013). In Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, the jury found negligence by both the doctor and the nursing staff, this was supported with evidence during the trial (Law School Case

On October 24, 2013 the courts ruled in favor for Ms. Adae for medicine negligence as well as all of her medical expenses, and any monetary needs for her new home that will accommodate her medical needs until she passes away. The court order the University of Cincinnati to pay the sum of a total of 3,311,762.84 to be paid to Ms. Adae and her husband immediately for pain and suffering and lost

For decades doctors have been revered, respected, and regarded as “saviors,” but what medical practitioners and health officials do not reveal is that there are some doctors that are unlawfully practicing medicine, and nothing is being done to stop them. Medical malpractice is the illegal or improper practice of medicine. Unfortunately, this is far too common. The people that are victims of malpractice often get no compensation for the problems a physician has created. Although doctors are trusted individuals and have a right to provide medical advice, perform surgeries, and prescribe medicine, patients should also be able to have more control and security in their medical dealings through new laws and regulations.

In the second case Johnson v. Misericordia Community Hospital, Corporate Negligence was clearly performed. Invispress.com states that “the existence of the records shows that Misericordia had been negligent in hiring Salinsky”. The facility should have done a more thorough investigation and followed the state’s bylaws and statutes pertaining to the proper credential verification on Dr. Salinsky upon applying to Misericordia Community Hospital before giving him the privilege to practice. If only they would have done that, they would have realized that Dr. Salinsky had falsified numerous statements on his application. I personally think that both the hospital as well as Dr. Salinsky are both at fault for the permanent damage they caused the patient

With regard to Dr. Rehman’s discontinuation of Glucovance, Glucovance is an anti-hyperglycemic drug that is used to treat patients with type 2 diabetes—from which Ms. Green suffered. Glucovance has the effect of lowering a patient’s blood sugar by increasing the body’s natural insulin production, and by decreasing the amount of sugar produced by the liver. Prior to her

Medical malpractice, the negligence of a health professional in diagnosing, treating, and or caring for a patient, is a specific tort law under the negligence torts. In the medical field, the tort reform has affected many people including doctors, lawyers, insurance company owners and workers, patients, and including other citizens. While large corporations, doctors, and other defendants are benefitting from caps on damages, that is limiting the amount of money that can be granted in court, plaintiffs, lawyers, and citizens are affected differently. Doctor Sage stated in an interview that he has, “never felt that caps on damages had a major effect on patients one way or the other” (“Could Malpractice”). This remark makes those injured question about

Medical malpractice differs from a standards negligence claim and some states have different definitions. There are two primary formulations for the legal standard of

Across the country, there are calls for medical malpractice tort reform based on the perception of frivolous lawsuits by patients with patients without valid claims and less-than-scrupulous lawyers are willing to prosecute them. On the one hand, the fact that some plaintiffs have received enormous settlements as a result of their medical malpractice lawsuits further fuels the debate that tort reform is needed to avoid these types of settlements that are incongruent with the facts. On the other hand, though, few observers would likely argue that some type of medical malpractice protections are required in order to protect patients from truly substandard and dangerous medical care practices and to compensate them for their injuries when these eventualities occur. One state that has implemented reasonable malpractice statutes and procedures that avoid these two extremes is Ohio where legislators passed tort reform laws in 2002. By contrast, many of the State of Michigan's laws on medical malpractice date back 40 years. This paper provides a description of the provisions of the medical malpractice statutes and procedures from these two states, followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.

Medical malpractice happens when a hospital, doctor or other health care professional, perform negligence through their practice and causes an injury to a patient, it may be the result of mistakes in diagnosis, management and after care or health management. (Podgers, 2007)

Negligence happens when a “person’s actions fall below a certain level of care. Negligence can involve doing something carelessly or failing to do something that should have been done.” (Fremgen, 2009, p. 35). In order to prove negligence the plaintiff must present the following elements: 1) duty to care, 2) breach of duty to care, 3) injury and 4) causation (Pozgar, 2012, p. 33). Duty to care is the first element which deals with the care that the defendant (physician) owes the plaintiff (the patient).

The treating doctor who has prescribed the pharmaceutical drug that caused harm to you is also held responsible as he/she is the part of distribution chain of the drug. The doctor also faces charges of neglect for his failure to warn you about the potential dangerous side-effects of the prescribed drug or give adequate instructions about the proper usage of the drug.

When it comes to fighting serious medical conditions, such as cancer or heart disease, detecting their presence early on can be essential. With the resources and technology available today, medical conditions that used to be fatal now can be routinely treated and remedied. However, if healthcare professionals fail to properly or timely diagnose a medical condition, treatment can be delayed and the person’s overall health can be compromised. In extreme cases, the delay in giving appropriate treatment can endanger a person’s life.Call Your Lawyer Today