TITLE

CA Court Determines State's Damage Cap Does Not Apply to EMTALA Claim

AUTHOR(S)
Fish, Michelle Bitterman; Bitterman, Robert A.
PUB. DATE
January 2009
SOURCE
ED Legal Letter;Jan2009, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p1
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article discusses the case of Romar v. Fresno Community Hospital et al. where the mother of Christina Romar, a toddler, sued the emergency department doctor for malpractice and the hospital for violating the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) by not providing appropriate medical screening exam (MSE). A California federal court allowed a "failure-to-screen" claim under EMLA but the California Supreme Court ruled against such decision because "disparate screening" which is in violation of EMTALA was not established.
ACCESSION #
35861854

 

Related Articles

  • PHYSICIANS ATTRIBUTE HIGHER COSTS TO DEFENSIVE MEDICINE.  // Medical Economics;3/19/2010, Vol. 87 Issue 6, p13 

    The article reports on a study that showed physicians attribute 26% of overall healthcare costs to the practice of ordering extra tests, referrals, procedures and hospitalizations to protect themselves from medical malpractice lawsuits.

  • Want to countersue? It's not that easy. Johnson, Lee J. // Medical Economics;10/11/99, Vol. 76 Issue 19, p179 

    Replies to an inquiry on a physician's ability to file a countersuit against a patient whose malpractice was dismissed by a court. Requirements for filing countersuits; Evidence needed to prevail in a countersuit; Obstacles to winning countersuits.

  • How to win that 'unwinnable' case.  // Healthcare Risk Management;Apr2009, Vol. 31 Issue 4, p45 

    The article provides suggestion on how to win a medical malpractice lawsuit in the U.S.

  • Good witness prep can improve odds.  // Healthcare Risk Management;Apr2009, Vol. 31 Issue 4, p46 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the plaintiff, a quadruple amputtee, allegedly accused the respondent, a physician, for medical malpractice in the U.S.

  • Unnecessary mastectomy: $6.5 million verdict in New York. Bachman, Radha V.; Reding, Barbara // Healthcare Risk Management;Sep2009 Legal Review, p1 

    The article discusses a court case wherein a woman, who underwent mastectomy, has sued various hospitals and physicians after finding out that the removed breast did not show any evidence of cancer.

  • Failure to diagnose staph infection: $5.45M verdict.  // Healthcare Risk Management;Sep2009 Legal Review, p3 

    The article discusses a court case wherein a complainant sued the hospital after it failed to diagnose his bacterial infection that led to further complications.

  • Failure to refer, diagnose, and properly chart care leads to fatal cardiac arrest: $1.5M verdict. Bachman, Radha V.; Rosenblatt, Lynn // Healthcare Risk Management;Oct2009 Supplement, p1 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the attending physician and the hospital for alleged failure to diagnose and refer the patient to a medical specialist.

  • Diseased transplant heart results in $2.7M verdict.  // Healthcare Risk Management;Oct2009 Supplement, p3 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the hospital and the physician for alleged negligent of a patient undergoing heart transplant.

  • For these doctors, potential claims have grown an endless tail. Rose, Joan R. // Medical Economics;11/23/98, Vol. 75 Issue 23, p26 

    Reports on a United States Supreme Court decision removing the time limit for the filing of malpractice lawsuits against physicians. Application of a standard statute of limitations.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

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

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics