TITLE

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE--WAIVER--CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS--VALIDITY OF AGREEMENT-- M.C.L. $ 600.5040--MICHIGAN

PUB. DATE
September 1982
SOURCE
Arbitration Journal;Fall82, Vol. 37 Issue 3, p74
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article presents information about the court case Moore v. Fragatos. In the case, it was held that in order for a medical malpractice claims arbitration agreement to be valid and binding, it must be provable that the patient chose arbitration knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. A patient was admitted for back surgery to Detroit Memorial Hospital, and subsequently filed a malpractice action, naming several doctors and the hospital as defendants. The hospital moved to compel arbitration, alleging that the court did not have jurisdiction over the dispute because the patient had signed an agreement to arbitrate upon admission, and had not revoked it within 60 days as required by the Michigan Medical Malpractice Act. The court noted that the patient could not make an intelligent choice if he was unaware of the consequence of what he was signing. The court remanded the case to afford the hospital an opportunity to prove that the patient willingly, knowingly, and intelligently signed the agreement thereby waiving his fundamental right to a trial.
ACCESSION #
17319491

 

Related Articles

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics