-
New Mexico Court of Appeals July 26, 2023Not cited Unpublished
Thus, the regulations relied on by the Estate apply on their face to practitioners, such as physicians and physician assistants, not corporate entities, like Doctor on Call.
negligence of the prescribing physician.
Call based on Doctor on Call’s own negligence.
-
California Court of Appeal August 16, 2021 No. B304043Not cited Unpublished
While there, the Doctors negligently performed a procedure that perforated his colon.
on the Doctors’ negligence was dispositive.
A physician is the ostensible agent of a hospital if the hospital intentionally or negligently causes the patient to believe the physician is the hospital’s agent. (Mejia, at p. 1453, 1456; Civ.
-
2005 Ohio 5103 Ohio Court of Appeals September 28, 2005 No. 22387.Cited by 30 Unpublished
was negligent." 3 Ohio Jury Instructions, Section 331.01 (6).
A medical malpractice analysis requires the trier of fact to first consider whether the physician was negligent, which requires the trier of fact to consider whether the physician failed to act as a physician of similar skill would
If a jury finds that the physician was negligent, it must then consider whether the negligence proximately caused the plaintiff's injuries. Id. {¶ 16} The jury unanimously determined that Appellees were not negligent.
-
841 F.2d 1125 Sixth Circuit March 8, 1988 No. 87-5099Not cited Unpublished
First, they argue that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting expert testimony from three doctors who testified that defendant Dr. Bohle was not negligent.
The primary issue at trial was whether the doctor was negligent by not identifying and protecting the ureter from harm.
Bohle was not negligent. Plaintiffs allege that it was error to allow these experts to testify that the doctor was not negligent because the witnesses did not have enough information on which to base such an opinion.
-
508 F. App'x 711 Tenth Circuit January 23, 2013 No. 12-1336Cited by 13 Unpublished
Moreover, “a complaint that a physician has been negligent in diagnosing or treating a medical condition does not state a valid claim of medical mistreatment under the Eighth Amendment.” Estelle v.
Saiz, 427 F.3d 745, 751 (10th Cir.2005) (“[T]he medical judgment of the physician, even if grossly negligent, is not subject to second-guessing in the guise of an Eighth Amendment claim.”).
-
175 F. App'x 300 Eleventh Circuit April 10, 2006 Nos. 05-12372; D.C. Docket 04-01216-CV-B-SCited by 5 Unpublished
Specifically, the government stated that, on April 30, 2001, Slater had filed a claim with the VA alleging that he had developed diabetes based on the negligent prescription of drugs by VA doctors in 2000.
Barrett, Regional Counsel for the Department of Veterans Affairs covering Alabama, who stated that, on April 30, 2001, Slater filed a claim alleging that he had developed diabetes as the result of VA doctors negligently prescribing
Also included was a June 11, 2001, claim alleging that VA doctors negligently failed to take him off of lithium carbonate between February 1988 and September 1997, causing hypothyroidism.
-
951 F.2d 351 Sixth Circuit December 10, 1991 No. 90-6542Not cited Unpublished
the patient is not ordinarily put on notice of the negligent conduct of the physician upon whose skill, judgment and advice he continues to rely. 11 Id., at 167-168 (quoting Myers v.
The court also rejected any claim of contributory negligence on the patient's part, stating that "(t)he fact that the patient ... continues in the doctor's care and knowingly continues his addiction will not make him contributorily
negligent unless he himself is doing something wrong or unless he knows his doctor is negligent."
-
404 F. App'x 789 Fourth Circuit December 14, 2010 No. 09-2141Cited by 9 Unpublished
They claimed that doctors’ negligent failure to properly treat Mark McEwen with anticoagulant medication on November 13 caused his stroke on November 15.
-
Superior Court of Rhode Island September 3, 2004 No. WC 2001-0072Not cited Unpublished
Broza, and South County Hospital, alleging that the decedent's death was the result of the doctors' negligence and that South County Hospital is vicariously liable under the doctrine of apparent authority. 2 South County Hospital
physician."
This negation results in an abrogation of Agency § 267 and, moreover, a means by which a state can hold a hospital, in essence, strictly liable for negligent treatment by their physicians retained as independent contractors.
-
Ohio Court of Appeals August 3, 2000 No. 99AP-787.Not cited Unpublished
committed by the four physicians discussed above.
In Lynd , the patient was referred by his private physician who, in turn, referred the patient to the allegedly negligent physician, Dr. Sherman. Moreover, there was no evidence in Lynd that Dr.
Davis, as Hopper's attending physician, was negligent in failing to monitor the care rendered to Hopper, for which USGC billed Hopper.
-
Ohio Court of Appeals September 27, 2002 Nos. C-020020, Trial No. A-0003612.Not cited Unpublished Concurrence
. {¶ 29} If the patient seeks out the doctor, and the doctor chooses a hospital as the sight of treatment, the hospital is generally not liable for the doctor's negligence — the doctor is truly an independent contractor.
When the patient seeks out the hospital, and the hospital provides a doctor, the hospital is liable for the doctor's negligence under long-standing and unquestionable agency principles. It is that simple.
-
1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 9213 Connecticut Superior Court September 15, 1994 No. CV 92 0515699-SNot cited Unpublished
At least this is specification of type of negligent activity involved.
(8) Unclear whether injuries and damages claimed resulted from alleged negligence in granting privileges to just these two doctors or claim is made that negligence in granting privileges to other doctors might have caused injury
-
New Jersey Superior Court App Division August 27, 2018 No. A-5439-15T1Not cited Unpublished
That is precisely what plaintiff alleged about the physician here. Thus, plaintiff's complaint alleged negligent diagnosis by a physician in violation of professional standards.
After describing "the negligence of the physician," his complaint repeatedly claimed defendant was "liable for the referenced negligent acts of" its "employees, agents, or servants."
Because plaintiff failed to provide such an AOM, he could not show those specialist physicians were negligent.
-
2014 IL 115526, 6 N.E.3d 128 Illinois Supreme Court March 20, 2014 No. 115526Cited by 11 Unpublished
App. 3d 408 (1991) (physician who was not patient’s regular doctor immune from negligence claim involving emergency prenatal care and delivery because he had no prior notice of the illness or injury, responded to an emergency,
The patient sued the physician for malpractice, alleging that his negligence in the delivery had caused the baby’s death.
If a hospital physician paid by the hour negligently provided emergency care to an affluent patient and the patient or the patient’s insurer was billed for that care, the doctor would not be immune under the Act.
-
California Court of Appeal June 24, 2025 No. G063413Not cited Unpublished
But he concluded that the nursing facility and its staff had been negligent. Plaintiffs’ counsel later learned that another defendant’s experts asserted negligence by hospital doctors.
This prompted counsel to consult with a vascular surgeon, “who opined about the negligence of doctors during the first hospitalization.”
According to counsel’s declarations, after consulting a new expert who opined about negligence by doctors during the initial hospitalization, they believed Kadakia had been negligent, leading to the Doe amendment.
-
California Court of Appeal April 29, 2016 No. H037604Not cited Unpublished
That Stanford Hospital & Clinics was negligent through its physicians, Dr. Ta and Dr. Manche; [¶] 2. That [Plaintiff] was harmed; and 11 [¶] 3. That Stanford Hospital & Clinics[’] negligence through it physicians, Dr.
of the doctors was negligent to prevail against Stanford.
Since Plaintiff alleged the negligent conduct was by the physicians that examined her at Stanford Hospital, CACI No. 400 was properly modified to note that Stanford Hospital’s negligence rested upon the negligence of it employee physicians
-
69 F.3d 541 Eighth Circuit October 31, 1995 No. 95-1849Not cited Unpublished
PER CURIAM. 1 George Melvin Cannon appeals the District Court's 1 dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of his claims against the United States for allegedly negligent medical treatment from military physicians while
On October 1, 1993, he filed an administrative tort claim with the Department of the Army alleging negligent medical treatment by military physicians.
United States, 904 F.2d 450, 451-52 (8th Cir.1990) (holding FTCA claim for allegedly negligent pre-induction physical by Air Force doctor was barred by Feres ). We further note that 10 U.S.C.
-
184 F. App'x 904 Eleventh Circuit June 19, 2006 No. 05-15623Cited by 8 Unpublished
Ravi Gupta and other unknown doctors and nurses at LRMC and described their negligence, as follows: The Claimant, Mr.
The Leesburg Medical Doctors were negligent in their treatment and lack of treatment to claiment [sic].
of the doctors and nurses at LRMC, a private hospital, because they were independent contractors.
-
107 F.3d 866 Fourth Circuit March 6, 1997 No. 96-1279Not cited Unpublished
Therefore, there was no need for the court to extend the continuing treatment rule by tolling the statute of limitations on the first doctor until the second doctor terminated treatment.
Similarly, in Justice, the court specifically found that the original negligent physician had seen the plaintiff every year for eight years. Justice, 381 S.E.2d at 10 .
-
Court of Appeals of South Carolina April 24, 2007 No. 2007-UP-187Not cited Unpublished
Huggins, as well as Columbia Psychiatric Associates, P.A.,[2] and Palmetto Baptist Hospital,[3] alleging the physicians were liable for memory loss she sustained following a course of negligent treatment for severe depression that
At trial, Salters offered expert testimony to establish the negligence of these physicians proximately caused her memory loss. At the close of the evidence, the physicians moved for a directed verdict. Dr.
A party relying solely on expert testimony to establish proximate cause between the physicians negligence and the plaintiffs injury, must introduce evidence the physicians negligence most probably resulted in the injuries alleged
Showing the top 500 cases. Narrow your search or add filters to see more.